RE: typo in OWL 2 structural specification, not semantics.

Hello,

 

Strictly speaking, this wasn't a typo because -0 is equal +0. I can see, however, that this can confuse people, so I've therefore
changed the document as you've suggested.

 

Thanks for this comment!

 

Regards,

 

            Boris

 

  _____  

From: public-owl-dev-request@w3.org [mailto:public-owl-dev-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Pat Hayes
Sent: 07 November 2008 18:43
To: public-owl-dev@w3.org
Subject: typo in OWL 2 structural specification, not semantics. 

 

http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-owl2-syntax-20081008/

 

section 4 specifies that 

 

-0 < x for each positive real number x

 

I believe this should be +0

 

Pat Hayes

 

Sorry about the wrong reference in the preceding message.





------------------------------------------------------------

IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   

40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office

Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax

FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile

phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes