- From: Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>
- Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 23:10:24 +0100
- To: Deborah McGuinness <dlm@ksl.Stanford.EDU>, Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- cc: webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Deborah McGuinness wrote: > i am happy if the suggestion is to drop the technical notes like the cycles > reference that i had been previously asked to put in if that is what is > being meant by being less technical and being dumbed down. > I would be unhappy if your editing round on friday is going to drop the > examples however since that is an important aspect to the usefulness of the > document i believe. There was no decision (nor great intent) to remove the examples, but to remove some of the techie-talk that crept into the document. [Actually, the msg from Jim were notes by Chris; I believe that my notes from earlierin the day more accurately represent what we agreed to be done on the document] > also, > it also looks from frank's note that there may be a request for the roadmap > in the feature synopsis and in jim's note it looks like the roadmap may be > separate and on the web page. > I think the second makes the most sense. > I am willing to help generate the roadmap; i just think having that as a > separate guide to reading is preferable to putting it in the feature > synopsis document The main function of the Synopsis (to be rebaptised as "Overview") is as first entry point for anybody wanting to learn about OWL. A single paragraph explaining what to read next for which purpose would not be out of place, I think, and easy to write. Frank. ----
Received on Thursday, 9 January 2003 18:10:31 UTC