- From: Christine Golbreich <cgolbrei@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 07:37:25 +0100
- To: Mike Smith <msmith@clarkparsia.com>, Ian Horrocks <Ian.Horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Cc: W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Thank you for pointing this The same links were validated OK before, at FPWD, and were not changed in the document Anyway, the 2 broken links are now fixed and the references as well. Thanks. Christine > ;2009/3/11 Mike Smith <msmith@clarkparsia.com>: > I looked at the use case used to motivate OWL 2 declarations [1] and > am confused about the goal of the references. > > One reference is a document about mediation of DIG 2 and DIG 1.x [2]. removed > The referenced document says nothing about declarations and, > consequently, I find the reference confusing in this context. > > Similarly, the OWLAPI reference [3] does not mention declarations. > > The TOOLS and SYNTAX PROBLEM references are broken links, so I was > unable to evaluate their applicability. > > I have not performed a similar audit on the other references in this > appendix, but extrapolating from this case I'm concerned about the > applicability of references throughout this appendix. > -- > Mike Smith > > Clark & Parsia > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/New_Features_and_Rationale#Use_Case_.2317_-_Tools_developers_.5BTools.5D > [2] http://www.webont.org/owled/2007/PapersPDF/submission_11.pdf > [3] http://www.webont.org/owled/2007/PapersPDF/submission_32.pdf > > -- Christine
Received on Wednesday, 18 March 2009 06:38:06 UTC