- From: Mike Smith <msmith@clarkparsia.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 13:29:13 -0400
- To: mak@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de
- Cc: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 13:21, Markus Krötzsch <mak@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de> wrote: >> Sandro offered 'original', and it works for me. I just want to avoid >> unnecessary misunderstandings with regard to the word 'normative'... > > Yes, I agree that there could be confusion here, and I am fine with "original" > (there are cases where there is more than one "original" syntax, but this > seems to be acceptable). I assume that we agree that this renaming would be an > editorial change to Conformance, so it does not interact with our CR schedule. > Changing this will affect some words in conformance, the property names in the > test ontology, the according properties and exports of the wiki, the > processing of these exports in Mike's test software, and the UI of the wiki. > Each of those is minor and should not be hard to do. A simplification, and what I thought Sandro and Ivan were actually proposing, is to change "normative" to "original" *just* in the wiki presentation of the test cases - i.e., leave Conformance and the test ontologies as is. -- Mike Smith Clark & Parsia
Received on Wednesday, 3 June 2009 17:30:03 UTC