Re: [regrep-cc-review] UBL Review of CCTS: Use of Qualifiers forObject Class Terms and Property Terms

Absolutely. In fact, I'm in the process of collecting all our
"assumptions" (the issue below, our handling of Properties, etc.) and
sending them to the CCTS Team in the next 1-2 days to allow them to
provide feedback to us if they feel that we have missed some major
points. If we don't receive any feedback (or what we consider to be
insufficient feedback), we'll stick with our assumptions and document
them in our final report to the CCTS Team.

Joe

Monica Martin wrote:
> 
> >Chiusano: I'm recalling our example of "ResidenceAddress. Details", where we were
> >questioning whether "Residence" results from one of the 8 context
> >drivers (it does not appear to). So in summary, we're not the only group
> >questioning that aspect.
> >
> >Unless there are strong objections (and please voice them now with lots
> >of supporting reasons), our handling will be to consider
> >"ResidenceAddress. Details" an ACC rather than an ABIE, because I don't
> >see where "Residence" is tied to one of the 8 context categories. A
> >question posed to the CCTS Team of this several weeks ago has resulted
> >in no response.
> >
> >
> mm1: Joe, I suggest we ask again and reinforce our concern with those
> questions raised by UBL.  Perhaps it will elicit a response.
> Thanks.