- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 10:01:10 -0600
- To: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@swi.psy.uva.nl>
- Cc: WebOnt WG <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, 2003-01-22 at 07:01, Guus Schreiber wrote: > When running the new examples in the Reference through ouur parser [1] I > discovered many small errors. Sorry for not checking that before > distributing. My Emacs cut-and-pasting worked poorly. I have attached > the cleaned-up version. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Jan/att-0365/01-owl-ref-v151.html#Header At a glance, I still find it hard to reconcile statements like this... "Thus any RDF graph forms an OWL ontology." which appeals to me, with this... "An OWL ontology consists of an optional ontology header and any number of class axioms, property axioms, and individual axioms." which seems to be talking about an ontology as if it were a piece of XML syntax. Is an ontology header a part of the RDF graph? Hmm... "A ontology header component is represented with an instance of the class owl:Ontology" Maybe I could get used to that. But this bit is wrong/overly-constraining: "which identifies the containing document". I suggest changing to which typically identifies the containing document. or even... which typically identifies the containg document using a same-document reference [section 4.2 of RFC2396]. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt > Mike will place it soon at its regular editor's draft spot. > > Guus > > [1] http://www.swi.psy.uva.nl/projects/SWI-Prolog/packages/sgml/online.html -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 23 January 2003 11:01:41 UTC