- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 08:22:36 -0400 (EDT)
- To: alanruttenberg@gmail.com
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
I think, then, that it is up to you to propose wording changes, and have them voted on. I, personally, think that the wording below is more than sufficient, although it has recently been removed from Syntax and thus the reply needs to be recrafted. peter From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com> Subject: Re: draft response for LC comment 66 AR1 Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 08:05:10 -0400 > I'm concerned that this doesn't go far enough. For instance the N-ary > datatypes extend into the realm of functions and we say nothing about > and the namespace http://www.w3.org/2005/xpath-functions, for > instance, is not mentioned in our spec. Moreover I would prefer a note > that is more proximate to the discussion of datatypes in the > conformance document. > > -Alan > > On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 9:58 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider > <pfps@research.bell-labs.com> wrote: >> [Draft Response for LC Comment 66:] AR1 >> >> Dear Alan, >> >> Thank you for your message >> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2009Feb/0272.html> >> on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts. >> >> Your message appears to be resting on a misconception concerning the >> status of the XML vocabulary in OWL 2. >> >> The Syntax document (draft at <http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Syntax>) >> states that: >> >> IRIs belonging to the rdf, rdfs, xsd, and owl namespaces constitute >> the reserved vocabulary of OWL 2. As described in the following >> sections, the IRIs from the reserved vocabulary that are listed in >> Table 3 have special treatment in OWL 2. All IRIs from the reserved >> vocabulary not listed in Table 3 constitute the disallowed vocabulary >> of OWL 2 and MUST NOT be used in OWL 2 to name entities, ontologies, >> or ontology versions. >> >> This means that the use of XML Schema datatypes that are not stated as >> usable in OWL 2 takes an ontology outside the scope of OWL 2. >> >> Please acknowledge receipt of this email to >> <mailto:public-owl-wg@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, >> Peter F. Patel-Schneider >> on behalf of the W3C OWL Working Group >> >>
Received on Thursday, 12 March 2009 12:21:58 UTC