public-owl-wg@w3.org from February 2009 by subject

(second) draft response for LC comment 14

13th European Conference on Digital Libraries - Call for Tutorials, Workshops, DC papers, Panels

13th European Conference on Digital Libraries - Calls for Special Tracks

13th European Conference on Digital Libraries - Final Call for Tutorials, Workshops and Panels

2nd Draft response to LC comment 30 (FH4)

3rd Draft response to LC comment 30 (FH4)

[LC response] To Jim Hendler (was Re: Fwd: Question re: HasKey entailments)

[LC Response] To Michael Smith (was Re: The definition of entailment in the Direct Semantics document)

[LC response] To Zhe Wu Re: OWL 2 LC Comments

A proposal for addressing LC comment 58 (fully typed functional-style syntax)

abstract preamble and "guide to documents" (LCC 10, ...)

ACTION-264: Discuss imports with Tim Redmond.

ACTION-268

ACTION-275: Unicode, XML, RDF references

ACTION-278 (Unicode reference in rdf:text)

ACTION-280 completed

ACTION-287: Draft of WG response to LC-Comment 51 / #1 (functional data properties)

ACTION-288 Completed (in a different way)

Agenda Amendment: JH1

Agenda TC 04/02/2009

Agenda TC 18/02/2009

Alan Ruttenberg: Re: notes from OWL and RIF datatype coordination meeting

approving responses to LC comments

Availability

comment on answer to comment... (OW/XML)

Comments on NF&R

Dealing with LC comments

draft for JH1 (keys)

Draft for the response to LC comment 58 (fully typed functional-style syntax)

draft response for 39 / BP1 (discussed in last TC)

draft response for 41 / BP3 (discussed in last TC)

draft response for 43b ZW3b

draft response for 47 / MK1 (discussed in F2F5)

draft response for LC comment 14

draft response for LC comment 16 (lexical value)

draft response for LC comment 25 RIF2

draft response for LC comment 26 (a and b)

draft response for LC comment 31

draft response for LC comment 32 CO1

draft response for LC comment 50

draft response for LC comment 51 RM1 and 62 JM1

draft response for LC comment 53

draft response for LC comment 62 JM1

DRAFT response to comment #54, Jan Wielemaker

Draft response to LC comment 15

Draft response to LC comment 38 (editorial)

Draft Response to LC comment 42/AS1

Draft response to LC comment 45

Draft response to LC comment 46

draft response to LC comment 56/57, TC1, Taylor Cowan

Drafting responses to LC comments.

F2F agenda

Fwd: Naming issues

Implemented Resolution of LC Comment 34 (TQ) on property chains in RDF-Based Semantics

Implemented Resolution on LC-Comment 16 ("lexical value") in RDF-Based Semantics

Introduction

Last call comment - conformance/datatype map

LC comment: sameAs in OWL QL

Minutes of 2009-01-04 teleconf

multiple-syntax-examples

Naming issues

New topics for NF&R

No teleconf next week (25th Feb)

notes from OWL and RIF datatype coordination meeting

Other GRDDL concerns which should not be lost

OWL 2 profile checker

OWL WG

OWL+RIF coordination meeting on datatypes

OWL2 and RDF

partial response for LC comment 21 JDB2

possible responses for LC Comment 23 JR1

Print out of Functional-style syntax has tiny fonts.

Profiles again (was Re: draft response for LC comment 26 (a and b) )

Proposal for multiple syntaxes everywhere

Proposal for use of labels in Manchester Syntax ISSUE-146, ACTION-247

proposed response to LC comment 43 sections 2,5,6

proposed response to LC comment 55

proposed response to LC comment 7

question on schedule

References templates

Remote Participation at OWL F2F

response for LC comment 23 JR1

Simpler editing of wiki tables

State of the RDF-Based Semantics document

Syntactic Conformance: "OWL 2 DL Ontology Document": sufficient definition?

Throw it away!

TR1

Update on NF&R

W3C Membership Survey

What happens when an ontology has data literals that are outside the range handled

XML Schema 1.1 LCWD

XML Schema last call documents and ACTION-252

Last message date: Saturday, 28 February 2009 20:42:10 UTC