Re: LANG: Nested Class definitions and the RDF striped syntax

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?


[2] well, actually, a design goal, not a requirement.

> so it doesn't suffer from the problem of 
> flattening grouped definitions into multiple top-level statements.

Dan Connolly, W3C

Received on Friday, 22 March 2002 12:13:08 UTC