W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > April 2003

Re: Proposed response to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/2003Apr/0049.html

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 24 Apr 2003 08:34:23 -0500
To: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@cs.vu.nl>
Cc: WebOnt WG <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1051191263.28479.1582.camel@dirk.dm93.org>

On Thu, 2003-04-24 at 06:41, Guus Schreiber wrote:
> Comments from Lacy Lee on OWL Reference:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/2003Apr/0049.html
>  > The examples in section 3.1.3 for the intersectionOf and unionOf 
> properties
>  > don't seem like they represent typical uses of the properties 
> (manipulating
>  > explicit enumerations).
> The enumeration examples were used to make clear to the user what the
> difference is between union and intersection, but it is true that these
> are not typical. We will consider replacing these with more typical
> examples.

I'd rather the response included the replacement text.


>  > Section 4.1's NOTE: says in OWL DL the domain and range of the 
> subPropertyOf
>  > property must be either both datatype properties or object 
> properties, but I
>  > would think the note would also apply to OWL Lite?
> By default, all OWL DL notes also apply to OWL Lite. OWL Lite is
> specified in Reference in terms of explicit restriction on OWL DL (see
> Sec. 8.3). We will make this clearer in the text.

And again here, it's even more important.

As a reviewer, I'd be hard pressed to say whether this response
satisfied my concern until I'd seen the text.

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 24 April 2003 09:34:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:04:44 UTC