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

proposed response to LC comment 55

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 15:47:30 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20090210.154730.77820279.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: public-owl-wg@w3.org

I am proposing the following response to LC Comment 55.

In the absence of disagreement I suggest that the RDF mapping document
be modified as suggested in the response, the modifications be accepted
as editorial, and the response sent out.


[Response for LC Comment 55:]

Dear Jonathan,

Thank you for your message
on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts.

You are completely correct that there is no need for the RDF Mapping to
be concerned about the exact form of an input document.  The only thing
that matters is that an input document can be parsed into an RDF graph.
There has to be some concern with documents to handle imports, however.

The document has therefore been changed to read

    An RDF Syntax ontology document is any document accessible from some
    given IRI that can be parsed into an RDF graph, ...

The diffs can be found at ..................................

The WG considers this to be an editorial change.

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. 

Peter F. Patel-Schneider
on behalf of the W3C OWL Working Group 
Received on Tuesday, 10 February 2009 20:48:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:09 UTC