LC Responses/JM1

From OWL
Revision as of 12:19, 18 March 2009 by PeterPatelSchneider (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

PeterPatel-Schneider 21:17, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

[Draft Response for LC Comment 62] JM1

Dear Jonas,

Thank you for your message <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/2009Feb/0010.html> on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts.

Your comment is related to another last-call comment <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/2009Jan/0059.html> and this response is the essentially same as the relevant portion of the response to that comment:

 Thank you very much for bringing it to our attention that we forgot to
 complete our work on naming datatypes. The Working Group has decided
 to allow the naming of datatypes in OWL 2 ontologies. In OWL 2 DL
 ontologies, this naming is restricted so that each datatype not in the
 datatype map names a single expression and does not involve a loop. 

In sum, you were not missing the fact that it was not possible to name datatypes. Instead, we were. We have now added this capability to OWL 2. Thank you for bringing our oversight to our attention.

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