- From: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 15:42:59 +0100
- To: Jie Bao <baojie@cs.rpi.edu>
- Cc: W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Summary: Thanks for all the hard work. Looks much better in general modulo being able to get the printing right. Details: 1) I fixed a few minor formatting and typographical issues. 2) Editor's Note: Christine suggested to use the same naming convention as in Syntax, e.g., CE, DR, OPE, DPE, a and lt. We discussed this briefly last week and agreed to retain the current slightly more compact notation. 3) Editor's Note: There are some links that are currently missing in Primer. Is this still the case? 4) I suggest removing the rather technical explanation about facets at the beginning of section 3.2 -- this isn't appropriate for QRG. I already commented it out. 5) I suggest re-ordering the columns in the facets table by swapping columns 2 and 3. The first two columns will then be what is typically required for QR purposes (facet and value) with the 3rd and 4th columns being "documentation". I also suggest changing the title of the 3rd column to "Applicable Datatypes". I think that the whole will then be sufficiently clear so as to obviate the necessity for the explanation (see 4 above). 6) The comment "New features in OWL 2 are (with links to New Features and Rationale)" seems pointless given that the title of the section is "New Features in OWL 2". I commented it out. 7) I doubt if "The following vocabulary is provided in OWL 1 but not encouraged in OWL 2." id needed in section 4.2 given that the title of the section is "Deprecated vocabularies in OWL 2".
Received on Tuesday, 5 May 2009 14:43:45 UTC