- From: Christine Golbreich <cgolbrei@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 18:00:24 +0200
- To: OWL 2 <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: Jie Bao <baojie@cs.rpi.edu>
Perhaps did I miss something, may I dare ask why the QRG is strictly limited to 2 pages in pdf? is that constraint so rigid? Christine 2009/4/15 Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>: > On 15 Apr 2009, at 16:32, Jie Bao wrote: > >> Hi >> >> Just to get some vogue idea how many pages QRG in print will have, I made >> a quick and dirty copy+paste into word and did a few layout setting [1]. >> Please don't be under the impression that this will be the final print >> version, or anything close. >> >> I don't think we may make a 2 page version any more with current contents. >> Currently it is 4 using Times New Roman font size 8. >> >> My heart still loves a 2 page version. Maybe one thing we can do is to >> reduce 3-column _tables_ into 2 column by dropping the first one (features), >> because 1) in print version links to primer and NF&R will not be needed; 2) >> many of the functional syntax is self- >> explanatory (e.g., SubclassOf), we only need to comment those that are not >> (e.g., ObjectHasSelf). > > Even there, we could "stack" the "feature name" and the FS, e.g., by adding > a comment rather than putting the feature name in its own cell. Or have a > > +------------+--------------------+ > +------------+ + > +------------+--------------------+ > > Style layout. > >> This will enable 3-column _document layout_ (as OWL 1 card [2] is) may >> save some space. Datatype section can also save some. > > I think there's a fair bit of space to be gained before having to cut > material. Look at binary data...that should be 1 line. > > Cheers, > Bijan. > > > -- Christine
Received on Wednesday, 15 April 2009 16:01:03 UTC