Subject: [LC response] To Daniel Barclay
Thank you for your comment
on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts.
We appreciate your careful reading of the document, and I have made the necessary corrections.
Please acknowledge receipt of this email to <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.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.
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
Regarding the OWL 2 Document Overview document current at http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview (http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-owl2-overview-20090611/): * Section 2.3 says: However, some conditions must be placed on ontology structures in order to ensure that they can be translated into a SROIQ knowledge base, for example, transitive properties cannot be used in number restrictions (see Section 3 of the OWL 2 Structural Specification document [OWL 2 Structural Specification] for a complete list of these conditions). That should be "... base; for example, ..." * Section 2.3 says "RDF-graphs." That should be simply "RDF graphs." * Section 2.3 says: ... Specification, i.e, as ... That sould be: ... Specification, i.e., as ... Daniel -- (Plain text sometimes corrupted to HTML "courtesy" of Microsoft Exchange.) [F]