- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2008 13:11:42 -0500 (EST)
- To: alanruttenberg@gmail.com
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
From: "Alan Ruttenberg" <alanruttenberg@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Updated Conformance and Test Cases Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 13:03:30 -0500 > On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 12:56 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider > <pfps@research.bell-labs.com> wrote: > > From: "Alan Ruttenberg" <alanruttenberg@gmail.com> > > Subject: Re: Updated Conformance and Test Cases > > Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 12:47:29 -0500 > > > >> > >> Some comments on conformance: > >> > >> I wonder whether there should be a more specific pointer to the > >> restrictions mentioned in the syntactic conformance, i.e. rather than > >> just pointing to the syntax document, pointing to > >> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-syntax/#Global_Restrictions_on_Axioms > > > > You mean copying normative text? I think that this is bad idea. > > No, I meant mentioning the section specifically in the citation rather > than the whole syntax document. Oops, my mistake. Pointing to the section would be a good idea. > >> A nit on the must accept/generate RDF/XML. Because of the syntactic > >> restrictions in RDF/XML that prevent serialization of all RDF, for > >> some OWL 2 Full document one MUST do something that isn't possible. I > >> suggest a footnote saying something about this. An alternative would > >> be to specify that NTRIPLES must be acceptable as well. > > > > I would just amend the text to "MUST, if possible". > > I be happy with that but would prefer to couple it with something > indicating that the other syntaxes SHOULD not be used in such a way as > to not have it be possible for the RDF/XML to serialize their > contents. Why not? > > [...] > > > >> "for example, very large integers". Do we not need a summary of what > >> minimal conformance for literals are? > > > > Already in Syntax. Perhaps a pointer is called for. > > At least. They are probably short enough, however, that it would be > useful to have them in this document. See my comment on copying normative text above. > >> -Alan peter
Received on Wednesday, 5 November 2008 18:12:56 UTC