RE: Proposal to close ISSUE-82: UML diagrams from Conrad Bock on 2008-04-18 (public-owl-wg@w3.org from April 2008)

From: Conrad Bock <conrad.bock@nist.gov>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 10:47:47 -0400
To: "'Peter F. Patel-Schneider'" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, <ekendall@sandsoft.com>
Cc: <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <0f3d01c8a163$2acaff00$b3200681@MEL.NIST.GOV>

Peter, et al,

 >  Sure, the UML should be valid UML, I wasn't proposing that 
 >  it not be.
 >  
 >  As far as I can tell, making the UML valid involves, the suggestions
 >  that Conrad made

FYI, Boris and I had a side call and agreed on the changes for
the abstract syntax diagrams so they will be valid UML.

Conrad

Received on Friday, 18 April 2008 14:48:33 UTC