Hmmm, but you could then reuse it as owl3.0 tick box :)
But seriously, when do you think the 2.0 stuff will be formalised/finilized, soon? Ch/Michel -----Original Message----- From: topbraid-composer-users@googlegroups.com [mailto:topbraid-composer-us...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Holger Knublauch Sent: 16 March 2009 17:31 To: topbraid-composer-users@googlegroups.com Subject: [tbc-users] Re: activate owl1.1 - small issue Hi Michel, yes that would work in theory. I hope you can live with this small inconvenience until the new namespaces for 2.0 will be finalized etc. Holger On Mar 16, 2009, at 6:46 AM, Michel Bohms wrote: > > Hi Holger, > > when you load an ontology that already has the owl11 name space, the > owl11 tick box is empty > would be more logical that this is detected and box is already ticked > > I know you could say it is "activate" and not "activated" but then I > would prefer the interpretation "activated" and preticked after > detection....(ie I prefer a tick box to correspond to a state iso a > event...) > > Michel > > This e-mail and its contents are subject to the DISCLAIMER at http://www.tno.nl/disclaimer/email.html --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TopBraid Composer Users" group. To post to this group, send email to topbraid-composer-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to topbraid-composer-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/topbraid-composer-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
