OWL WG, The email from Boris [1] that floated a proposal to put more restrictive language into the syntax document also suggested removing note 2 in 2.1.1 of the conformance document as well as the entirety of section 2.2. It would be nice to have the difference between OWL 2 DL ontology document conformance and OWL 2 tool conformance (where additional datatypes support is permitted) continue to be highlighted like this somewhere in our documents. -Evan Evan K. Wallace Manufacturing Systems Integration Division NIST [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2009Apr/0454.htmlReceived on Wednesday, 1 July 2009 15:17:35 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 July 2009 15:17:36 GMT