W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webont-comments@w3.org > September 2003

Re: Proposed reply for O rdf:type owl:Ontology optional?

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 12:40:42 -0400
Cc: public comments <public-webont-comments@w3.org>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Message-Id: <0258AE69-EAC0-11D7-8C02-0003939E0B44@isr.umd.edu>

On Friday, September 19, 2003, at 12:16  PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider 

> A while ago Bijan made a comment on ontology type triples.  I believe 
> that
> this comment has been addressed by one of yesterday's WG decisions.
> I thus propose the following reply:
> Thank you for your comment.  As it was received outside of the Last 
> Call
> review period it has not received the prompt attention it should have.

No problem. Wasn't meant as LC; just seeking clarification. As with the 
subsequent email.

> On 18 September 2003 the WebOnt Working Group decided (see
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Sep/0216.html) to
> make the O rdf:type owl:Ontology optional for anonymous ontologies.

Yes, I think that reconciles S&AS with Reference

> Changes to this effect have been made in the editor's draft of OWL 
> S&AS,
> available at http://www.bell-labs.com/usr/pfps/owl/semantics/
> Please reply to public-webont-comments@w3.org indicating whether you 
> think
> this is a satisfactory response to your commment.

It's satisfactory. Thanks.

Bijan Parsia.
Received on Friday, 19 September 2003 12:37:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:09:29 UTC