Re: CR Exit Criteria

From: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: CR Exit Criteria
Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 06:04:44 -0500

> On 21 May 2009, at 00:53, Peter F.Patel-Schneider wrote:

[...]

>> 1. Resolve dependencies on rdf:text (currently at Last Call) and XSD
>>    1.1 Datatypes (currently at Candidate Recommendation).
>>> or put rdf:text as risk as described in previous email
> 
> We agreed to make it "at risk" in the spec, so we should mention it  
> here. I added "Note that rdf:text is marked as "at risk", and may be  
> removed from the OWL 2 specification."

Umm, if rdf:text goes away OWL 2 needs something to replace it with, so
I think that the wording should be something like

"Note that rdf:text is marked as "at risk", and may be replaced with a
datatype with name owl:text that serves the same purpose.
Implementations will be able to switch to owl:text by simply replacing
occurences of rdf:text with owl:text."

[...]

> Ian

peter

Received on Friday, 22 May 2009 11:37:54 UTC