- From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 17:50:19 +0100
- To: SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>, phayes@ihmc.us
Hi everyone (cc Pat) About today's action: ACTION: Antoine provide a pointer to the new Primer Editor's Draft [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/02/24-swd-minutes.html#action05] Following Pat's personal mail (copied below) about the answer I proposed to his comment [1], I have updated a sentence to the Primer. The new version is at [2] Best, Antoine [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2009Feb/0068.html [2] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/primer/primer-20090224.html -------- Message d'origine-------- De: Pat Hayes [mailto:phayes@ihmc.us] Date: mar. 24/02/2009 15:24 À: Antoine Isaac Objet : Re: [SKOS] RE : misleading sentence in the SKOS primer On Feb 24, 2009, at 1:38 AM, Antoine Isaac wrote: > > Dear Pat, > > Thank you for taking the time to report on this. That's much > appreciated! Indeed we certainly want to avoid any misleading. > > I propose to rewrite the sentence as: > [ > In particular, there is no logical dependency between skos:inScheme > and owl:imports: the use of owl:imports will not result in the > presence of any skos:inScheme statements other than the ones already > asserted in the imported graph." > ] > > Do you think that would be better? > Yes, perfect. Thanks. As I say, your example does make the point clear once one has read that far :-) Pat
Received on Tuesday, 24 February 2009 16:50:55 UTC