Re: a proposal for defining OWL DL documents

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Subject: Re: a proposal for defining OWL DL documents (was Re: OWL, XML-RDF and Imports)
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 20:56:31 -0600

> On Sun, 2003-02-16 at 08:54, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> > Continuing along with Sean's reasoning, I propose that the definition of
> > an OWL DL document, i.e., an RDF/XML document that is an OWL DL ontology,
> > be modified to be:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > DEFINITION:  An RDF/XML document is an OWL DL ontology if 
> 
> [...]
> 
> Could you give some examples to show the difference between
> this proposal and the spec as written? 

[...]

Well right now the specification does not talk about documents at all.  All
that matters currently is an RDF graph, so this is in some sense a
clarification.  One way of reading the current specification is that Peter
Crowther's examples are currently valid.  This change would the second one
(where a restriction is split over several documents) illegal.

peter