- From: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@swi.psy.uva.nl>
- Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 13:37:47 +0100
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- CC: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Peter, Below are a few detailed comments that came up when reading through while revising Reference. Guus 1. Sec. 2, sentence about OWL Lite [[ This smaller language is a useful language that provides more than RDF Schema ]] make clear that OWL Lite is not just "more" but also "less" than RDF Schema (e.g. extension of a restriction) 2. Sec. 2.3 axioms [[ The restriction construct gives the local range of a property, how many values are permitted, and/or a collection of required values. ]] "and/or" should be "or" 3. Sec. 4.1 mapping to RDF graphs 3.a. EquivalentClass: Shouldn't there be a separate mapping rule for EquivalentClass with a single description? 3.b. Deprecation of datatypes?! [[ [DatatypeID rdf:type owl:DeprecatedClass] ]] Do we allow deprecation of datatypes? Using owl:DeprecatedClass seems wrong, as this is a subclass of owl:Class and classes and datatypes are constrained to be disjoint. 3.c. owl:DataRange In the rule for "oneOf(V1 ... Vn)" the first triple: _x rdf:type rdfs:Class should be replaced by _x rdf:type owl:DataRange 4. Sec. 4.2 disallowed vocabulary owl:DataRange is missing from this list -- A. Th. Schreiber, SWI, University of Amsterdam, http://www.swi.psy.uva.nl/usr/Schreiber/home.html
Received on Wednesday, 19 March 2003 07:37:51 UTC