seaman at noao.edu
Fri Feb 8 12:35:09 PST 2008
> 1> we put in short definitions to the vocabulary as time allows, and
> 2> definition work will not hold up a draft
> Could we vote on whether to do this (add definitions) or not?
Happy to vote yes on #2 and to abstain on #1. Have at it.
Suggest "add definitions" is a poorly framed ballot measure (like so
many in AZ :-)
> Please get away from trying to argue we don't want to create a
> traditional dictionary which has an effective domain of "everywhere".
Can't parse this sentence - certainly wasn't what I was arguing :-)
Core of most arguments from the VOEvent caucus in this WG is that we
define a project of limited scope and carry it to completion in an
GRB example on the mailing list differed from the draft's spiral
galaxy example, i.e., not:
skos:definition """A burst of gamma-rays."""@en;
Concern blossomed at the added labor apprehended. Glad to learn
More information about the semantics