- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 13:02:03 +0100
- To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Michael Schneider" <schneid@fzi.de>, <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
On 31 Jul 2008, at 12:48, Alan Ruttenberg wrote: > There are choices that could be made. > > 1) That the model is of the functional grammar, and that API > developers ignore ordering information. This ties the model more > tightly with the goals of the document, which is to expose the syntax The abstract syntax. We have a number of linear syntaxes and possible linear syntaxes. > 2) That additional attributes be added to the model to indicate > which choices are made for the functional syntax. > > In my view, if the model is part of this document, it should > reflect what the document says. Either of the above choices would > do that. (there may be others) I do not see how the current situation does not reflect what the document says. I do not see how either of the above choices do better, in fact, I think they change what it says. I don't like the change, either. I speak as someone who doesn't particularly like diagrams. Bijan.
Received on Thursday, 31 July 2008 11:59:42 UTC