- From: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 11:30:06 +0100
- To: public-owl-comments@w3.org
Begin forwarded message: > From: "Jeremy Carroll" <jeremy@topquadrant.com> > Date: 2 April 2009 15:07:40 BDT > To: "'Ian Horrocks'" <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk> > Subject: RE: [LC response] To Jeremy Carroll > > > This is fine thanks. > Jeremy > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ian Horrocks [mailto:ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk] >> Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 1:22 PM >> To: Jeremy Carroll >> Cc: public-owl-comments@w3.org >> Subject: [LC response] To Jeremy Carroll >> >> Dear Jeremy, >> >> Thank you for your comment >> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/ >> 2009Feb/0008.html> >> on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts. >> >> Thank you for pointing out this problem. The Syntactic Conformance >> section of the Conformance and Test Cases document (see [1]) has been >> revised to be clearer in general and to rectify these problems in >> particular. The main definitions of the different kinds of ontology >> documents now refer explicitly to the RDF/XML syntax and are now >> complete definitions, e.g.: >> >> "An OWL 2 DL ontology document is an OWL 2 Full ontology document >> that can be successfully parsed using the canonical parsing process >> as defined in the OWL 2 Syntax specification [OWL 2 Specification] >> and the procedure for mapping from RDF graphs to the structural >> specification described in the OWL 2 Mapping to RDF Graphs [OWL 2 >> Mapping to RDF Graphs] to produce an instance of the OWL 2 ontology >> class satisfying all of the restrictions described in Section 3 of >> the OWL 2 Syntax specification [OWL 2 Specification]." >> >> Similarly, the example is now specific to the XML syntax. It says "An >> XML document is an OWL 2 DL ontology document iff [certain conditions >> are met]"; i.e., an XML document is an OWL 2 DL ontology document if >> said conditions are met, and it is not an OWL 2 DL ontology document >> if said conditions are not met. >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/ >> Conformance_and_Test_Cases#Syntactic_Conformance >> >> Please acknowledge receipt of this email to <mailto:public-owl- >> comments@w3.org> (replying to this email should suffice). In your >> acknowledgment please let us know whether or not you are satisfied >> with the working group's response to your comment. >> >> Regards, >> Ian Horrocks >> on behalf of the W3C OWL Working Group >
Received on Friday, 3 April 2009 10:30:59 UTC