Re: ACTION-277 complete

Hi

I propose to change the sentence: "Please note that we will have a more
extensive documentation of the rationale behind this design in the NF&R as
well as some discussion in the primer. The working group will contact you
when they reach last call to see if the overall solution meets your
concerns"
by

"Please note that we have added more extensive documentation of hasKey
feature in the Syntax, NF&R and a better explanation in the RDF-Based
Semantics. The rationale behind this design from a theoretical perspective
is summarized in the section Theoretical Perspective" of the NF&R (see
http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/New_Features_and_Rationale#F9:_Key). We will
have also some discussion in the primer.

I'm not sure about the first sentence, "The working group was unsure ..."
and prefer to let others to clarify it.

Christine

2009/1/30 Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>

>
> I've completed a draft of a reply to JH1:
>
>        http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/LC_Responses/JH1
>
> And I think it is ready for review. It's neutral as to whether we add the
> additional change I've proposed.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bijan.
>
> --------------------------
>
> Dear Jim,
>
> Thank you for your comment
>     <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/
> 2009Jan/0004.html>
> on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts.
>
> Obviously, it is important that the spec be clear to everyone. The working
> group was unsure whether your database expertise "got in the way" of seeing
> the rationale or not, but regardless, it is worth trying to avoid such
> confusions. To this end, we've added a couple of sentences to the first
> paragraph of
>       <http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Syntax#Keys>
> which we hope will prevent such confusion in the future.
>
> Please note that we will have a more extensive documentation of the
> rationale behind this design in the NF&R as well as some discussion in the
> primer. The working group will contact you when they reach last call to see
> if the overall solution meets your concerns.
>
> Please acknowledge receipt of this email to <mailto:public-owl-
> comments@w3.org> (replying to this email should suffice). In your
> acknowledgment please let us know whether or not you are satisfied with the
> working group's response to your comment.
>
> Regards,
> Bijan Parsia
> on behalf of the W3C OWL Working Group
>
>


-- 
Christine