W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > January 2008

Re: converging on publication (checklinks, SOTD, change description)

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 05:37:37 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20080105.053737.56006194.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: sandro@w3.org
Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org

I fixed the one real problem for syntax.  There is still the problem
that the Wiki software turns an example text URl into a link.  I don't
know how to turn that off.

The differences from OWL 1.0 are abstracted in the abstract.  :-)

Changes from the submission (actually from lightly modified submission
documents) can be easily gleaned from the change log.

peter


From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Subject: converging on publication (checklinks, SOTD, change description)
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 14:30:25 -0500

> Editors, please check your links.  There are some broken ones.  Just
> append ",checklinks" to the end of the wiki page URL to see them.  (it
> takes a couple of minutes to run, though.)
> 
> (Ignore the complaints about favicon.ico, mediawiki.org, and w3.org/2007/OWL)
> 
> EG Syntax has broken links for SROIQ, PFPS, and my.domain.com.  (One
> should use example.com, as per RFC 2606, not my.domain.com, as I
> understand it.)
> 
> Other than that, we're getting close to ready.
> 
>    http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/draft/ED-owl11-syntax-20080104/
>    http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/draft/ED-owl11-semantics-20080104/
>    http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/draft/ED-owl11-mapping-to-rdf-20080104/
> 
> I would really like (and management may require) a paragraph in each one
> (probably in SOTD) which explains the difference from the submission and
> the differences from OWL 1.0.
> 
> Does anyone see anything else that needs to be changed before
> publication?
> 
>      -- Sandro
Received on Saturday, 5 January 2008 11:02:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:13:29 GMT