W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > April 2009

Fwd: OWL XML Serialization Review

From: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2009 18:15:00 +0100
Message-Id: <E3DA8B29-448F-44C3-820B-7D95578A57CC@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
To: W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Begin forwarded message:

>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Michael Grove <mike@clarkparsia.com>
> Date: Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 12:58 PM
> Subject: OWL XML Serialization Review
> To: Kendall Clark <kendall@clarkparsia.com>
>
>
> I have just a few comments on the OWL2 XML serialization document that
> I wanted to pass along.  I think as a vehicle for conveying the XML
> Schema to users, the document is perfectly reasonable.  The schema
> seems good and everything lines up with the structural specification.
>
> However, I think if some of the intent of the document is as a
> reference for implementors, it needs some more content.  There's only
> one simple example, and the rest of the document is dominated by the
> schema itself. I think if there were a few more examples, especially
> some non-trivial ones, that would be very helpful.  Furthermore,
> there's a reference in the document that some things in the OWL2 spec
> cannot be captured in the XML schema, but there is not an example, or
> any clear explanation of why that is the case. That is useful
> information, and would have made the document more valuable,
> especially to someone trying to implement the spec.
>
> Of course, if it's not intended as a guide or reference for
> implementors, I think its fine.  But if people are supposed to refer
> to this while working on a parser, I think it falls short.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mike
>
Received on Monday, 6 April 2009 17:15:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 6 April 2009 17:15:36 GMT