- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 22 Mar 2002 10:43:36 -0600
- To: Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>
- Cc: WebOnt WG <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
On Fri, 2002-03-22 at 04:07, Frank van Harmelen wrote: [...] > An important feature of the OWL Light segment is that it's > *only*< syntax is > of slots grouped into frames, Now I'm confused; I thought the proposal[1] was an abstract syntax. We have a requirement for an XML serialization of our language[2]; the BNF in the proposal isn't XML. So surely there will be some other syntax, no? [1] http://www.cs.vu.nl/~frankh/spool/OWL-first-proposal/ <- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Mar/0210.html [2] well, actually, a design goal, not a requirement. http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-webont-req-20020307/#goal-xml > so it doesn't suffer from the problem of > flattening grouped definitions into multiple top-level statements. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Friday, 22 March 2002 12:13:08 UTC