Re: [LC response] To Umberto Straccia Re: Concept constructors

Ok.

	-umberto Straccia

On Apr 30, 2009, at 6:12 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:

> Dear Umberto,
>
> Thank you for your comment
> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/2009Apr/0075.html 
> >
> on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts.
>
> Unfortunately, adding syntactic sugar does have a significant
> specification and consensus building cost, particularly as it adds to
> the OWL 2 vocabulary, which has already been objected to by some
> communities (see, e.g., [1]). Therefore the working group has decided
> not to augment the language with the ObjectImplicationOf constructor  
> at
> this time.
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/65
>
> 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,
> Peter Patel-Schneider