Re: new reply to comments by Bijan Parsia

small comment ...

Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:

>>>>2) Completely Editorial: I would like the normative version of the
>>>>document to be a single HTML file. I know, off hand, of no other (at
>>>>least modern) W3C recommendation that is split up merely for
>>>>navigational purposes. It's inconvenient, it's inconsistent even with
>>>>the other OWL specs, and annoying, especially for offline reading.
>>>I agree somewhat, but do find the separated version to be helpful
>>>sometimes.  I was asked to make the switch from a single to a compound
>>>document, and I'm not particularly interested in switching back.
>>Er...but none of the other documents, afaik, either in webont or 
>>rdfcore are compound. Few if any, again afaik, modern W3C recs are 
>>compound. I would have thought that that would be determinative :)
>>Not a biggy, but it does annoy me each and every time. And I often 
>>forget that it's compound and thus load up only the first page and find 
>>myself off line with not what I wanted. Oh well. Bookmarking the single 
>>file will work. But I predict other people's annoyance.
> No change is likely to be made here.

OWL Test is a compound doc, and so far I have only had positive feedback on 
that change.

Weakly suggest adding

"OWL Test Cases is also a compound document."

(or not)


Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2003 16:56:31 UTC