W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > July 2003

Re: helping folks read the OWL schema

From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 09:16:39 -0400
Message-ID: <009f01c34f8a$56786dc0$b6f5d3ce@svhs.local>
To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <www-webont-wg@w3.org>

hmmm... do we already have (somewhere):

<owl:AnnotationProperty rdf:about"&rdf;comment" />

?

Jonathan

>
>
> I had understood that we did not have comments in owl.rdf because of
logical
> worries of some members of the group ... (i.e. that the rdfs:comment
fields
> are not normatively true).
>
> This would also hold for a rdfs:seeAlso or a dc:source
>
> I am neutral.
>
> It would be possible to use an XML comment without these problems.
>
> Jeremy
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: www-webont-wg-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:www-webont-wg-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Dan Connolly
> > Sent: 18 July 2003 19:35
> > To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
> > Subject: helping folks read the OWL schema
> >
> >
> >
> > Mike,
> >
> > In case somebody finds an OWL document
> > and follows the namespace pointer to get
> > clues about the terms,
> > could you please add a pointer to the OWL
> > specs from the OWL schema? use rdfs:seeAlso
> > or dc:source or some such.
> >
> > Also, In order to make it
> >   http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl
> > more readable, I suggest adding
> > a stylesheet link:
> >
> > <?xml-stylesheet href="http://www.w3.org/2002/06/rdfs2html.xsl"
> > type="application/xml"?>
> >
> > For some examples of how this works, see
> >   http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/pim/email
> >   http://www.w3.org/2002/01/bookmark
> >   http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rec54
> >
> > --
> > Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
> >
> >
>
>
Received on Monday, 21 July 2003 09:18:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:01 GMT