Re: [Fwd: Comments for OWL Candidate Recommendation]

At 10:36 AM -0700 9/21/03, Deborah L. McGuinness wrote:
since some of our members have not participated as far as I can tell, 
i am not clear that the wording change she suggests below -
s/members of this working group/participants in this Working Group/

is appropriate. 
This seems like an internal administrative decision that all editors 
should follow
both in terms of the wording and the listing of the people.
I thought it was less disputable to state membership and then use the
listing on the site.
If we list participants then it seems like someone should figure out
who has actually participated (and that may also include people who are
not members now but have participated in the past).
I can not make that complete listing but will use it if someone makes it.


Deb - I looked where Susan directed us -- she's right.  Participants 
mean participants in the WG  members generally means W3C members 
(i.e. the organizations).  So Susan is pointing out that to be 
consistent w/W3C practice, we should either say "Members of this 
working group" and then list the organizations (Stanford, 
Hewlett-Packard, Sun, etc.) or say "Participants in this working 
group" and then list the individuals.  I prefer the latter.
  As far as who has participated, there are many people who have come 
and gone, some participating more than others, but all making some 
sort of contribution in some way along the process (sometimes via 
emails to chairs and team that were not shared with all members of 
the WG).  My instinct is to be inclusive and give everyone the 
benefit of the doubt.
  So my preference is to do what Susan suggests (go w/participants). 
Also, we've had a few more people join - before we move to the next 
stage, we should update the list to include the new members as well.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Comments for OWL Candidate Recommendation Resent-Date: Sun, 
21 Sep 2003 02:26:38 -0400 (EDT) Resent-From: 
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 23:26:32 -0700 From: Susan Lesch 
<><> To: 


These are minor editorial comments for your OWL Candidate
Recommendation [1,2,3,4,5,6], I hope in time for your deadline.

Overview [1]
s/members of this working group/participants in this Working Group/

For the References section, there is an example here:


Guide [2]
s/members of this group working group/participants in this Working Group/

For the References section, there is an example citation here:

Links outside, like rdf:ID need a reference and section. There is an
example here:

Section 7.2 most likely needs to be rewritten to point only to IANA
reserved sites per RFC 2606 (, and
or if you need evocative names, e.g. The
examples and links here could be omitted. If they can't be omitted and
you can assure persistence then they can be references. If I can be of
assistance please let me know and I will help rewrite this. I am sorry
to have to say this at CR.

     A number of sites exist today that call themselves wine portals.
     Google for example, provides 152,000 matches for the query "wine
     portal". One of the top matches, a site called "",
     provides access to a number of sites. Many sites claiming to be
     wine portals are mostly informational sites. For example,'s first featured site, called 'cork cuisine'
     (<>, provides 
information about matching wines
     and foods, wines as gifts, etc. Another site billed as "the
     Internet Wine Portal" ( 
<> provides a nice
     organization of a substantial amount of wine information on
     numerous topics.

Similarly, links like these should be omitted or made into citations.
wine agent


OWL Reference [3] is beautifully done!
s/members of this group working group/participants in this Working Group/


Semantics and Abstract Syntax [4]
s/members of the W3C Web Ontology Working Group/participants in the
W3C Web Ontology Working Group/


Test Cases [5]
s/web-site/Web site/
s/working group/Working Group/
s/members of this group working group/participants in this Working Group/


Use Cases and Requirements [6]
s/members of this group working group/participants in this Working Group/

OntoWeb, The Open Directory Project, Agentcities, can be references if
you need to link to them.

In the References section, the work's title should be the link. There
is an example here: 



Best wishes for your project,
Susan Lesch           
<>               tel:+1.858.483.4819
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)    <>

Professor James Hendler
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  *** 240-277-3388 (Cell)      *** NOTE CHANGED CELL NUMBER ***

Received on Sunday, 21 September 2003 17:15:31 UTC