- From: Rinke Hoekstra <hoekstra@uva.nl>
- Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 11:27:40 +0200
- To: Boris Motik <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Cc: "'OWL 1.1'" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>, "'Sandro Hawke'" <sandro@w3.org>
On 7 aug 2009, at 11:22, Boris Motik wrote: > 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. +1 Rinke > > 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 > > --- Drs Rinke Hoekstra Leibniz Center for Law | AI Department Faculty of Law | Faculty of Sciences Universiteit van Amsterdam | Vrije Universiteit Kloveniersburgwal 48 | De Boelelaan 1081a 1012 CX Amsterdam | 1081 HV Amsterdam +31-(0)20-5253499 | +31-(0)20-5987752 hoekstra@uva.nl | hoekstra@few.vu.nl Homepage: http://www.leibnizcenter.org/users/rinke
Received on Friday, 7 August 2009 09:28:23 UTC