Reference, beginnings of HP review?

At 06:22 23/01/2003 +0100, Jeremy Carroll wrote to an HP list:
>I volunteered an "HP review" (i.e. mine if no-one elses) of

An initial (edited) reaction was

The first thing I look at is:

which begins:

[[OWL classes are viewed as sets of individuals]]

An OWL class is not a set, and to view it as such is WRONG!

[see] previous reviews [..]


Could I ask that the editors check that these comments raised on previous
versions have been addressed, or respond negatively on the comments list.

Is this document stable enough to review yet?

I notice that the version number keeps changing - which is probably a good
sign for the document quality, but makes reviewing more difficult.


Received on Thursday, 23 January 2003 04:17:24 UTC