I have received the reply to this comment and am satisfied with the working group's response. -Jonathan On Feb 19, 2009, at 10:44 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > Dear Jonathan, > > Thank you for your message > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/2009Feb/0001.html > on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts. > > You are completely correct that there is no need for the RDF Mapping > to > be concerned about the exact form of an input document. The only > thing > that matters is that an input document can be parsed into an RDF > graph. > There has to be some concern with documents to handle imports, > however. > > The document has therefore been changed to read > > An RDF Syntax ontology document is any document accessible from > some > given IRI that can be parsed into an RDF graph, ... > > The diffs can be found at > > http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=Mapping_to_RDF_Graphs&diff=18155&oldid=17663 > > The WG considers this to be an editorial change. > > Please acknowledge receipt of this email to > <mailto:public-owl-comments@w3.org> (replying to this email should > suffice). In your acknowledgment please let us know whether or not you > are satisfied with the working group's response to your comment. > > Regards, > Peter F. Patel-Schneider > on behalf of the W3C OWL Working GroupReceived on Thursday, 19 February 2009 22:13:20 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 19 February 2009 22:13:21 GMT