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

Re: [OWLWG-COMMENT] Example why current RDF mapping for QCRs might hurt OWL-1.1-Full

From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:49:02 -0500
Message-Id: <5CB223AD-4E43-4B67-BAF0-81D2AADD2CF0@cs.rpi.edu>
Cc: Matthew Pocock <matthew.pocock@ncl.ac.uk>, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>, Owl Dev <public-owl-dev@w3.org>, Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
+1 to needing better discussion of reqs.  I don't however think there  
is a hidden agenda, I think the agendas are clear -JH

On Dec 17, 2007, at 9:38 AM, Jeremy Carroll wrote:

> Jim Hendler wrote:
>> <flame on - but not at Matthew>
> without wishing to fan Jim's flames, ...
> one aspect I noted at the F2F was that there is this decidability  
> litmus test there is some wiggle room, and the actual drivers for  
> what was a compelling argument and what wasn't had to do with the  
> use cases and customers who we each had in mind.
> I found this was most noticeable when I talked about geometry.
> Obviously this was my *personal* interest rather than a business  
> interest, so as HP rep, I am not going to push this. But any  
> computational difficulties in using OWL to describe various  
> geometric problems that I am interested in are basically  
> irrelevant, in everybody's opinion (including mine), because  
> geometrical reasoning (particularly the rather abstract problems  
> that I like) is simply not a use case. (Fundamentally because  
> mathematicians are poorer than bioscientists).
> So, as HP rep, I found the Oracle presentation compelling, much  
> more compelling than most, because the Oracle customers and the HP  
> customers are similar and doing similar things. However, none of  
> the presentations were explicit in terms of customers, and we have  
> made precious little advance on a use case and requirements  
> document, so that the hidden differences between us (the various  
> members of this WG) in terms of what we are trying to do with OWL,  
> for whom, and why, remain hidden.
> I think, until we have made significant advance in Use Case and  
> Requirements, Jim will continue to feel that the rest of the group  
> have an agenda hidden from him, and is wanting to make decisions  
> that don't make sense to him.
> Jeremy

"If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would  
it?." - Albert Einstein

Prof James Hendler				http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~hendler
Tetherless World Constellation Chair
Computer Science Dept
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY 12180
Received on Monday, 17 December 2007 16:50:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:58:16 UTC