W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > July 2008

Re: ISSUE-126 (Revisit Datatypes): A proposal for resolution

From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 10:45:41 -0400
Message-Id: <70865291-C412-449E-8726-2E42D9850FB0@gmail.com>
Cc: "'Michael Smith'" <msmith@clarkparsia.com>, "'OWL Working Group WG'" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
To: "Boris Motik" <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>

On Jul 1, 2008, at 10:17 AM, Boris Motik wrote:

I agree with everything you say in your email, except this:

> - We should say that (http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-xsch-datatypes/) is  
> an incorrect interpretation of the OWL 1 specification. After all,  
> this document was nonnormative, so this may be acceptable.

I don't believe we have to say anything about the relationship of  
this note to OWL 1, as I don't think it speaks as an interpretation  
of OWL 1. Rather we can just say something about what motivates our  
choice in the requirements document, if we choose to adopt a  
differing solution.

Received on Tuesday, 1 July 2008 14:46:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:05 UTC