Dear Ian, Thank you for the response. The proposed change in the conformance specification should address my concern. Best, Jos Ian Horrocks wrote: > Dear Jos, > > Thank you for your comment > > <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/2009Feb/0007.html> > on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts. > > Thank you for pointing this out. The intention is that all OWL profiles > can be interpreted according to either the Direct semantics or the > RDF-based semantics. Thus an OWL RL implementation using the Direct > semantics would be conformant. We have revised the text in the > Conformance specification to make this clear. > > 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, > Ian Horrocks > on behalf of the W3C OWL Working Group > > -- +43 1 58801 18470 debruijn@inf.unibz.it Jos de Bruijn, http://www.debruijn.net/ ---------------------------------------------- Many would be cowards if they had courage enough. - Thomas FullerReceived on Sunday, 8 March 2009 12:01:37 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 8 March 2009 12:01:37 GMT