Warning:
This wiki has been archived and is now read-only.
LC2 Responses/JC4
To: jeremy@topquadrant.com
CC: public-owl-comments@w3.org
Subject: [LC response] To Jeremy Carroll
Dear Jeremy,
Thank you for your comment
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/2009May/0015.html>
on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts.
Thank you for your positive comment on the new versioning setup in OWL 2.
We draw your attention to the Primer, New Features and Rationale, and Quick Reference Guide documents, with editors' drafts available at
http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Primer, http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/New_Features_and_Rationale, and http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Quick_Reference_Guide. Each of these user-friendly documents mention the improvements in OWL 2, but this is particularly the case in New Features and Rationale.
Please acknowledge receipt of this email to <mailto:public-owl-comments@w3.org> (replying to this email should suffice). In your acknowledgment please let us know whether or not you are satisfied with the working group's response to your comment.
Regards,
Peter F. Patel-Schneider
on behalf of the W3C OWL Working Group
CUT AND PASTE THE BODY OF THE MESSAGE (I.E. FROM "Dear" TO "Group") INTO THE BODY OF AN EMAIL MESSAGE. SET THE To:, CC:, AND Subject: LINES ACCORDINGLY.
PLEASE TRY TO REPLY IN A WAY THAT WILL ALLOW THREADING TO WORK APPROPRIATELY, I.E., SO THAT YOUR REPLY CONTINUES THE THREAD STARTED BY THE ORIGINAL COMMENT EMAIL
| A positive comment for a change :), sorry for the earlier comments!
We very much like the improved versioning support in OWL2. This is relevant to several of our customers. As an editorial comment, we would suggest that some of the more user friendly documents should make the improvements clear, and provide somewhere to where we can point our customers to give an overview of the improvements. Jeremy Carroll, AC Rep, TopQuadrant, Inc. |