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

Normative vs. Informative references

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:56:57 +0000
Message-Id: <EDF8AF5F-ACAC-4A8B-82BA-B1F77C554839@cs.man.ac.uk>
To: W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>

I notice when looking at the RDF documents that they split their  
references into Normative (i.e., those referenced normatively) and  
Informative. This was very helpful and I think we should emulate it.  
For example, in the syntax we have:

"""[OWL 2 XML Syntax] OWL 2 Web Ontology Language: XML  
Not normative (in the sense that nothing in syntax depends  
*normatively* on the XML Syntax, not that XML syntax isn't normative  
for its domain).

"""[SROIQ] The Even More Irresistible SROIQ. Ian Horrocks, Oliver  
Kutz and Uli Sattler......"""
Obviously not normative.

"""[XML] Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.1..."""
I don't know. It could be either.

Ooo, and we don't want 1.1!!!!!

"""[XML Namespaces] Namespaces in XML 1.0 (Second Edition)...."""

"""[XML Schema Datatypes] W3C XML Schema Definition Language (XSD)  
1.1 Part 2: """

Er...normative? but it's a working draft that says not to cite it...

Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2009 19:53:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:08 UTC