- From: Boris Motik <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 10:22:12 +0100
- To: "'OWL 1.1'" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: "'Sandro Hawke'" <sandro@w3.org>
Hello, Matthew Horridge has found certain discrepancies in naming between the Structural Specification and the OWL XML syntax. It was always our intention that the names in these two documents would be closely aligned. Unfortunately, due to numerous changes, we forgot to update the OWL/XML document. My proposal is to rename the elements in the OWL/XML document along the lines of what Matt suggests. Although this does affect implementations, I consider this change "almost editorial": it does not change anything conceptual in OWL 2. Therefore, if we document the name change clearly in our document, I think we should be fine. Please let me know whether you are OK with this change. Regards, Boris -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Horridge [mailto:matthew.horridge@cs.man.ac.uk] Sent: 07 August 2009 09:43 To: Boris Motik Subject: Name differences in OWL Functional Syntax and OWL/XML Hi Boris, I was doing some bug fixing in the OWL API last night and going over things and I noticed that there is a discrepancy between some of the names used in the functional syntax and OWL/XML (sorry this has come so late, but I've only just noticed). There are two places where the names of elements in OWL/XML are different from the names used in the functional syntax. They are Functional Syntax --> OWL/XML ----------------------------------------------------------- ObjectPropertyChain --> PropertyChain ObjectInverseOf --> InverseObjectProperty I take it the functional syntax names are the correct ones. Cheers, Matthew
Received on Friday, 7 August 2009 09:24:02 UTC