- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Wed, 06 May 2009 07:49:44 -0400 (EDT)
- To: sattler@cs.man.ac.uk
- Cc: baojie@cs.rpi.edu, public-owl-wg@w3.org
This organization seems much cleaner to me. peter From: Uli Sattler <sattler@cs.man.ac.uk> Subject: QRG - a suggestion Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 10:26:35 +0100 > Hi Jie, I had another look at the QRG (which looks neater and clearer > than ever!) and would recommend to turn 2.5 into "Axioms" and move the > following axioms into it: > > - Class Axioms > - Property Axioms > - Datatype Definitions (they are currently in 1 line in the 'data ranges' > - Table. > - Keys > - Assertions > > I think it's conceptually much clearer (and thus might help people > finding things they are looking for) - what do you think? Cheers, Uli > > ---- Current ToC: > > 2 OWL 2 constructs and axioms > > * 2.1 Classes > * 2.2 Properties > * 2.3 Individuals & Literals > * 2.4 Data Ranges > * 2.5 Keys > * 2.6 Assertions > * 2.7 Declarations > * 2.8 Annotations > * 2.9 Ontologies > > > > ---- Suggested ToC: > > 2 OWL 2 constructs and axioms > > * 2.1 Classes %% minus Class Axioms > * 2.2 Properties %% minus Object Property Axioms and Data Property Axioms > * 2.3 Individuals & Literals > * 2.4 Data Ranges %% minus "datatype definition" > * 2.5 Axioms > %% Class Axioms > %% Assertions > %% Object Property Axioms > %% Data Property Axioms > %% Datatype definitions > %% Keys > * 2.6 Declarations > * 2.7 Annotations > * 2.8 Ontologies > >
Received on Wednesday, 6 May 2009 11:49:27 UTC