- From: Jie Bao <baojie@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 13:11:15 -0400
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: schneid@fzi.de, public-owl-wg@w3.org
Does this look ok to you? http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Quick_Reference_Guide&oldid=23301#Additional_Vocabulary_in_OWL_2_Full Jie On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com> wrote: > From: Jie Bao <baojie@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: OWL Full Features in QRG (was Re: Issue-104) > Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 12:42:29 -0400 > >> OK. Since all the response so far are against including RDF >> vocabulary, I'm happy to remove them. >> >> How about just list the 5 OWL terms: >> >> owl:DataRange, owl:distinctMembers, owl:OntologyProperty, >> owl:DeprecatedClass, owl:DeprecatedProperty >> >> And indicate that owl:DataRange is deprecated in OWL 2, but others are not. >> >> As to the name of the section, I still prefer "Additional Vocabulary >> in OWL 2 Full" than the alternative proposal of "Compatibility >> Vocabulary", because the later may lead some people to think that >> those terms are not encouraged to use. > > Well, they are not encouraged, at least as far as I am concerned, but I > don't mind the proposed section name. > Thanks! >> Jie > > peter > -- Jie Bao http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~baojie
Received on Wednesday, 6 May 2009 17:12:02 UTC