Re: Proposal to request Candidate Recommendation

On Wed, 2003-07-23 at 18:59, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> From: Jim Hendler <>
> Subject: Re: Proposal to request Candidate Recommendation
> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 13:07:36 -0400
> [...]
> > I think our current editors documents are very close to the current 
> > versions of the RDF Core documents - and that changes we haven't yet 
> > implemented are likely to be editorial (by definition - if they 
> > change their design, they need to go back to LC)
> [...]
> Hmm.  In my opinion the design of RDF has changed significantly post last
> call.  Several of these changes have required changes to OWL.

As I understand it, these have required changes in the way OWL
is specified, but they haven't actually changed the design of OWL;
i.e. if you implemented OWL before RDF core made those changes,
your implementation would still work. RDF Core decisions didn't
impact outcomes of our tests.

Hmm... maybe I should read Jeremy's messages about test and
some other stuff more closely to see if I've got this right.

> Does this really mean that RDF Core will have to do another last
> call?

It's possible... they discussed this in a recent telcon...

Do we need a second last call?

Discussion of document changes, some are arguably substantial:
See IRC log from 14:55:42 (at URI above)
DanC advises:  in order to not do another last call,
we'll need to convince The Director that the design we've got
(after all these changes) has been widely reviewed

Please draft PR request... use that as basis of last call decision
-- Minutes of telecon: 2003-07-18 (revised)

> peter


Received on Thursday, 24 July 2003 01:02:59 UTC