LC3 Responses/PT1

To: phtyson@sbcglobal.net
CC: public-owl-comments@w3.org
Subject: [LC response] To Paul Tyson

Dear Paul,

Thank you for your comment
     <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/2009Oct/0000.html>
on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts.

You are quite correct that those should all be "refs". Thanks for the catch. I've fixed the schema, see:

  <http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=OWL_XML_Schema&diff=25943&oldid=25667>

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,
Bijan Parsia
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

In the xsd definition of groups "AnnotationSubject", "AnnotationValue",
"AnnotationPropertyDomain", and "AnnotationPropertyRange":

All have <xsd:element name="AbbreviatedIRI"/>.

Perhaps should be <xsd:element ref="owl:AbbreviatedIRI">?

Multi-schema validator warns about implicit use of "anyType" content 
model in these definitions.