RE: new versions of SWRL draft

From: Mike Dean ([email protected])
Date: 03/25/04

Next message: Peter F. Patel-Schneider: "Re: new versions of SWRL draft"

Previous message: Peter F. Patel-Schneider: "new versions of SWRL draft"
In reply to: Peter F. Patel-Schneider: "new versions of SWRL draft"
Next in thread: Peter F. Patel-Schneider: "Re: new versions of SWRL draft"
Reply: Peter F. Patel-Schneider: "Re: new versions of SWRL draft"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

Thanks, Peter!

Your updates are now in CVS and at [1].

Several questions/comments on the XML Syntax:

I assume swrlx:dataRange addresses the class/datatype checking inconsistency
you mentioned on this week's telecom.  Does this replace section 8.1?

Shouldn't swrlx:datarangeAtom include a swrlx:dObject rather than a
swrlx:iObject?

I'm not sure I understand exactly how to use the new URIreference in
ruleml:imp.  It might be good to add it to Example 5.1-1.

I thought that swrlx:builtinAtom would have a swrlx:builtin attribute
(analogous to swrlx:property) rather than using URIreference.

Shouldn't swrlx:builtinAtom and swrlx:datarangeAtom (see above) now also be
parents of swrlx:dObject?

	Mike

[1] http://www.daml.org/rules/proposal/

Next message: Peter F. Patel-Schneider: "Re: new versions of SWRL draft"
Previous message: Peter F. Patel-Schneider: "new versions of SWRL draft"
In reply to: Peter F. Patel-Schneider: "new versions of SWRL draft"
Next in thread: Peter F. Patel-Schneider: "Re: new versions of SWRL draft"
Reply: Peter F. Patel-Schneider: "Re: new versions of SWRL draft"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 03/25/04 EST