[LC response] To Jim Hendler

Dear Jim,

Thank you for your comment
      <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/ 
2009Jan/0004.html>
on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts.

In subsequent discussion, our understanding is that you have agreed  
that the way keys interact with classes (i.e., the class is  
additional check, not something to be inferred) has merit but that  
the documentation should more clearly indicate that merit. See your  
message:

        <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Dec/ 
0055.html>

To this end, we have followed your suggestion and added a couple of  
sentences to the first paragraph of
        <http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Syntax#Keys>
which we hope makes things clear.

This response supercedes any prior response.

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,
Bijan Parsia
on behalf of the W3C OWL Working Group