- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 18:16:15 +0100
- To: "Jeremy Carroll <jjc" <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: www-archive@w3.org
> I have finished the first cut at the updates agreed at f2f. > > The document can be found at: > > http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/snapshot.html > > I am going to: > - print it off and look at it > - run it through the various W3C checkers > > > make some last updates and then circulate it to the WG for review. > > This would be a good time to make any comments. > > I suggest looking at > > http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/snapshot.html#conformance I think that in 4.1.1 one link (OWL Lite..graph form) should point to ..#OWL_DL_Lite_graphs instead of ..#OWL_Lite_RDF_graphs I guess that [RFC 2119] should point to the References which could say [RFC 2119] Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels -- http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt I think you have made a good wording with "MAY return Unknown..in the case where a resource limit has been exceeded." (good idea as well btw ;-)) > and > > http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/snapshot.html#changes fine maybe I've made some cases Full whereas they could have been Lite or DL (wasn't always sure...) I think this can move forward (I've also done testing and remain with 7 NP+) -- , Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Monday, 20 January 2003 12:16:54 UTC