Again, thank you for your comments. I do not propose to make any change here, as I feel that adding a new kind of description does not help the exposition. > Another suggestion to the Abstract Syntax of OWL Lite: > > In the current spec, > type ::= classID | restriction (in Lite) > type ::= description (in DL ) > super ::= classID | restriction > description ::= classID | restriction|... > > Please consider the possibility: > type ::= descriptionLite (in Lite) > super ::= descriptionLite > descriptionLite ::= classID | restriction > > > Thanks for your concern! > > Yuzhong Qu Peter F. Patel-Schneider Bell Labs Research Lucent TechnologiesReceived on Friday, 9 May 2003 15:04:43 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:43:28 GMT