- From: Alan Rector <rector@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 09:37:26 +0100
- To: Christopher Welty <welty@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: public-swbp-wg@w3.org
Chris I* agree. Sorry to have been elusive. Bandwidth bottleneck. I agree. The abstract syntax, possibly glossed with something more readable. Alan On 11 Aug 2005, at 03:53, Christopher Welty wrote: > > I am (finally) working on incorporating the review comments in the > next > version of the simple parts note, and am finding this ridiculous > triple > notation a real obstacle for understanding and writing the OWL > code. I'm > not sure why everyone has been using it in these notes - was it just a > personal preference? > > The OWL abstract syntax was specifically designed to be easy to > read/type > for humans - I am going to switch the examples to that, at least > for this > note. > > -Chris > > Dr. Christopher A. Welty, Knowledge Structures Group > IBM Watson Research Center, 19 Skyline Dr., Hawthorne, NY 10532 > Voice: +1 914.784.7055, IBM T/L: 863.7055, Fax: +1 914.784.7455 > Email: welty@watson.ibm.com > Web: http://www.research.ibm.com/people/w/welty/ > > ----------------------- Alan Rector Professor of Medical Informatics Department of Computer Science University of Manchester Manchester M13 9PL, UK TEL +44 (0) 161 275 6188/6149 FAX +44 (0) 161 275 6204 www.cs.man.ac.uk/mig www.clinical-esciences.org www.co-ode.org
Received on Thursday, 11 August 2005 08:36:29 UTC