W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > November 2002

Clarification: Guide suitable for release

From: Jerome Euzenat <Jerome.Euzenat@inrialpes.fr>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 11:21:55 +0100
Message-Id: <a05111b03b9efee3fb361@[194.199.20.189]>
To: "Smith, Michael K" <michael.smith@eds.com>, webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>

Me again,

In my message (Re: Guide suitable for release) of 07/11/2002, I wrote:
>Set Operators
>[...]
>
>Moreover, the section begins with a "Since OWL class extensions are 
>sets", may be something should be reminded here.
>I thought the following: "Sometimes we want to emphasize the 
>distinction between a class as an object and a class as a set 
>containing elements. We call the set of individuals that are members 
>of a class the extension of the class." taken from the "Basic 
>definitions" section can come here (it is not used in the Basic 
>definitions, but in the "Design for use part" which is 
>self-explanatory).
>The word extension is used once with reference to the semantics.

OK I was not clear. Bottom line: I thought of moving the paragraph 
from the beginning of "Basic defs" but it is not that easy because 
the word "extension" is used once before.

>There is a lot of proper name (and even prices) in this example, it 
>does not look to be common W3C policy

I also hope that the Texan wine is fictuitious. If not, W3C might 
have a nice lawsuit about the joke...

Regards,
-- 
  Jérôme Euzenat                  __
                                  /      /\
  INRIA Rhône-Alpes,            _/  _   _   _ _    _
                               /_) | ` / ) | \ \  /_)
  655, avenue de l'Europe,    (___/___(_/_/  / /_(_________________
  Montbonnot St Martin,       /        http://www.inrialpes.fr/exmo
  38334 Saint-Ismier cedex,  /          Jerome.Euzenat@inrialpes.fr
  France____________________/                Jerome.Euzenat@free.fr
Received on Thursday, 7 November 2002 05:22:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:55 GMT