W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-dev@w3.org > January to March 2007

RE: Names or not?

From: Turner, David <davidt@hp.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 17:23:46 -0000
Message-ID: <86FE9B2B91ADD04095335314BE6906E8D6D495@sdcexc04.emea.cpqcorp.net>
To: <public-owl-dev@w3.org>

> From: Bernardo Cuenca Grau [mailto:bcg@cs.man.ac.uk] 
> > Should NC (etc) be defined as a set of *names* of OWL 
> classes (etc)? 
> 
> Yes, indeed. Of course, the fact that these are names is kind 
> of implicit since these sets are part of a vocabulary, but we 
> should probably say this explicitly.

Thanks. I am currently caring about the difference between a wotsit(*)
and its name.

Cheers,

Dave

(*) all the best words for wotsits have more precise meanings than I
would like: Thing, Individual, Entity, Object, Resource are all gone!

-- 
Dave Turner  Cube T400, HP Labs Bristol, Filton Road, Bristol BS34 8QZ
davidt@hp.com          +44 117 3129104 (Work) +44 7962 811627 (Mobile) 
Received on Thursday, 22 February 2007 17:23:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 27 March 2013 09:32:54 GMT