- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 12:47:42 -0400
- To: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu>
- Cc: WebOnt <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
At 10:15 AM -0400 7/16/03, Jeff Heflin wrote: >Jim, > >Point taken. I also prefer your second suggestion (i.e., change >"typically" to "assumed to be". > >Before I send the message I'd like to see if the WG has a preference on >whether or not we need to include some discussion of how OWL meets our >requirements somewhere in our document set. This was a theme that ran >throughout Ken's post. > >Jeff > I sort of like this idea - What about if we had an appendix to the reqs document that directed people to the appropriate document parts -- that way it wouldn't require a lot of new text? Could be a table like (these are random - not tracking the real things): O1 "Realized via mapping to RDF" http://sas/ O2 "Issue raised, but postponed" http://issues... ... R1 "Realized via mapping to RDF" http://ref/... R2 "see owl:sameAs" http://guide/... -- Professor James Hendler hendler@cs.umd.edu Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies 301-405-2696 Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab. 301-405-6707 (Fax) Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 *** 240-277-3388 (Cell) http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler *** NOTE CHANGED CELL NUMBER ***
Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2003 13:52:23 UTC