- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 06:23:17 -0400
- To: <conrad.bock@nist.gov>
- Cc: "'Peter Haase'" <haase@fzi.de>, "'Boris Motik'" <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
On Aug 5, 2008, at 4:45 PM, Conrad Bock wrote: > Alan, > >> Either: > >> 1) The Model is presented in one place, and portion of a document >> that defines a syntax explicitly gives how one maps from the syntax >> to the model or > > This assumes we have one metamodel for multiple syntaxes, see > discussion > with Bijan. > >> 2) The Model that is presented interleaved with the functional style >> syntax models that syntax. > > This is the case in the syntax document. A model of that particular > syntax is inteleaved with the rest of the documentation on that > syntax. > >> The current situation asks for confusion. We have two different >> things presented as if they are one. > > Sorry, didn't follow, are #1 and #2 the two things we're currently > doing? It is my impression that we are doing neither. My take is that we have a model related to, but not of, the syntax, as the order of elements in the expressions is not captured and in the functional syntax order matters. So to get to 1 we would pull the model out and make mapping explicit or to get to 2 we would add ordering to the model. -Alan
Received on Wednesday, 6 August 2008 16:03:01 UTC