- From: Uli Sattler <sattler@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:16:06 +0100
- To: Jie Bao <baojie@cs.rpi.edu>
- Cc: "OWL Working Group WG" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>, "Elisa F. Kendall" <ekendall@sandsoft.com>, "Deborah L. McGuinness" <dlm@cs.rpi.edu>, "Evan Wallace" <ewallace@cme.nist.gov>
Hi, and thanks for the draft! I would like to make some suggestions regarding the structure of the language reference: would it be possible to name & order the 'headers' such that they reflect their content? E.g., an Object Property Restriction is a class description, and so are other restrictions and class expressions. In contrast, axioms have a different status. Could and should this somehow be reflected or taken into account? Cheers, Uli On 20 Aug 2008, at 04:58, Jie Bao wrote: > > Hi All > > There is an update draft of the OWL 2 quicl reference guide at: > > http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/images/8/8e/Owl2- > refcard_2008-08-19.pdf > > Please note that draft is yet incomplete. As some naming issues are > pending, there are terms with the "?" mark > > Comments are welcome. > > Regards > > Jie (representing Elisa, Deborah and Evan) > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 8:23 AM, Elisa F. Kendall <ekendall@sandsoft.com > > wrote: >> >> Hi Alan, >> >> I exchanged email with Li Ding, who originally created the semantic >> web card >> you've referenced, below. He provided the original MS Word version >> we can >> use as a starting point - will email Ivan off list on migrating >> that to some >> other form so that we can "play with it". >> >> Thanks, >> >> Elisa >> >> Alan Ruttenberg wrote: >> >>> >>> Conversation with Ivan: >>> >>> Alan: >>> There's some interest in having something like a quick reference >>> card. >>> Formatting/typesetting of this card would be important, in order >>> to have it >>> fit on the page, etc. However Peter pointed out that this may not >>> be to the >>> W3C's liking for reasons of accessibility, viewing on any device, >>> etc, so I >>> was tasked with an action to ask you about what guidelines are >>> with respect >>> to this. >>> >>> There's a semantic web one that someone produced that is >>> inspiration. >>> http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/resource/html/id/94/ >>> Basically we're still trying to avoid a situation where we create >>> redundant documents. This would be a creative way of handling an >>> important function of the overview and there was general >>> agreement in the >>> UFDTF that this sort of thing is useful. >>> >>> Ivan: >>> >>> AFAIK, such cards have been produced before both for OWL and >>> SPARQL (but >>> I may be wrong). But never as an 'official' W3C deliverable. >>> >>> Peter is right that there would be quite a problem with W3C >>> producing a >>> W3C recommendation or any other document in PDF (only). If >>> somebody could >>> come up with a clever way of achieving the same effect with CSS >>> (and then >>> have it in forms of PDF, too), well, that could work. Otherwise >>> we keep it >>> non-official. >>> >>> -Alan >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >
Received on Wednesday, 20 August 2008 17:24:47 UTC