Re: issues to be resolved before last call

From: "Jeremy Carroll" <>
Subject: RE: issues to be resolved before last call
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 14:53:20 +0100

> > Here are some issues that I feel must be resolved before OWL goes to last
> > call.
> How many really must be resolved now, and cannot be addressed as part of the
> last call process on RDF.
> None of them seem to be in order for webont to discuss, other than as
> comments about RDF that need fixing.
> In fact, this seems to be largely a stylistic problem between Brian (series
> editor) and yourself. Brian decided that he wanted to operate a document
> freeze process before last call - you clearly believe that your problems are
> sufficiently important to merit changing the frozen documents. I,
> personally, while not much liking the document freeze policy, do not think
> that your issues cross that bar - except for the social meaning one, for
> which RDF Core explicitly decided to take it as a last call issue.

Well, to put it bluntly, the RDF model theory is a mess.  It has missing
and unclear definitions, inconsistencies, and consequences that are counter
to my understanding of the intent of the RDF Core WG.  I have reported many
of these problems over the last month and little has been done to fix them.
I don't consider these sorts of things as editorical issues.

Most changes to the RDF model theory will require changes to the OWL model
theory, and probably several changes to get the correspondence right.  I am
unwilling to go to last call for OWL with this sort of problem hanging over
my head.

Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Bell Labs Research
Lucent Technologies

Received on Friday, 17 January 2003 09:08:07 UTC