- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2009 08:18:50 -0500 (EST)
- To: cgolbrei@gmail.com
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
From: Christine Golbreich <cgolbrei@gmail.com> Subject: Re: draft response for LC comment 26 (a and b) Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2009 11:12:23 +0100 > Seems good, specially concerning the actual role of users and 'implementors' > in the OWL 2 Profiles and in particular for RL where, making implementations > on top of rule extended DBMS possible, e.g. ORACLE, is clear. Perhaps point > to a concrete example ? A concrete example of what? I'm not sure that explicitly mentioning ORACLE in the response is the best approach. > Given the sentence in Lilly's comment "... in particular, identifying > different subsets of OWL2 for developers with limited logic background. ..." > it might be welcome to add that profile checkers* are on the way that will > offer such functionality and allow them for checking just as they did I added a sentence about profile checking to the response, http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/LC_Responses/SS1a > Christine > > * as pointed out by > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2009Feb/0035.html peter
Received on Sunday, 15 February 2009 13:19:13 UTC