my vote

[Rob Seaman]

> 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  
timely manner.

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  
otherwise.

Rob