- From: Evan Wallace <ewallace@cme.nist.gov>
- Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 15:53:46 -0400
- To: public-owl-wg@w3.org
Alan wrote: > In: > The reason for a normative and recommendation track status for the OWL 2 > XML syntax is to say that OWL 2 tools that use an XML syntax for OWL 2 > *should* use the XML syntax provided in the OWL 2 recommendation. > > s/that use an XML syntax/that use an XML syntax for exchange of/ > Presumably this should be fixed in the underlying document unless > obvious from the immediate context > rdf/xml is an XML syntax. To avoid needlessly courting controversy, we should say something like: "... tools that use an XML schema specified syntax for OWL 2 *should* use the XML schema provided in the OWL 2 recommendation." I used the original text to illustrate the change, but the point is independent of the presence or absence of "for exchange of". -Evan
Received on Monday, 16 March 2009 19:54:34 UTC