- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 05:55:00 -0500 (EST)
- To: connolly@w3.org
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org, seanb@cs.man.ac.uk
From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> Subject: Re: a proposal for defining OWL DL documents (was Re: OWL, XML-RDF and Imports) Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 20:56:31 -0600 > On Sun, 2003-02-16 at 08:54, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > > Continuing along with Sean's reasoning, I propose that the definition of > > an OWL DL document, i.e., an RDF/XML document that is an OWL DL ontology, > > be modified to be: > > > > > > > > DEFINITION: An RDF/XML document is an OWL DL ontology if > > [...] > > Could you give some examples to show the difference between > this proposal and the spec as written? [...] Well right now the specification does not talk about documents at all. All that matters currently is an RDF graph, so this is in some sense a clarification. One way of reading the current specification is that Peter Crowther's examples are currently valid. This change would the second one (where a restriction is split over several documents) illegal. peter
Received on Monday, 17 February 2003 05:55:18 UTC