- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 09:00:48 +0000
- To: W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/LC_Responses/MD1
I include the text below.
The current link seems broken to me. If I click on the attachment in
Safari I get a download of an .eml file (which indeed has the message).
If that's ok, then, modulo typos, I think I'm done. We may want to
wait until the changes have been completed before sending and, indeed,
ask him for review.
Cheers,
Bijan.
P.S., you definitely have to do a bit of hand clean up on the results
of the template :) E.g., adding spaces between paragraphs.
-------------------------
Dear Martin Duerst,
Thank you for your comment:
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/2009Jan/0003.html
>
on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts.
NOTE COMMENT LINK IS SORTA WRONG! SANDRO...CAN YOU GIVE DIRECT LINK?!?
Thank you for drawing this to our attention. The hardcoded references
to Unicode 3.0 were inherited from RDF and RDF/XML. Upon
investigation, the WG decided that we did not need to and should not
add more "point of update" for Unicode (or XML) references in spite of
our dependancy on RDF and RDF/XML. Accordingly, we have shifted to a
generic reference, as described in:
<http://www.w3.org/TR/charmod/#sec-RefUnicode>
We have done similarly with XML and added text to our conformance
document describing the situtation.
We also filed a bug report against the RDF specs:
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2009JanMar/0001.html
Please acknowledge receipt of this email and let us know whether or
not you are satisfied with the working group's response to your comment.
Regards,
Bijan Parsia
on behalf of the W3C OWL Working Group
Received on Thursday, 29 January 2009 09:01:39 UTC