W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > November 2007

Re: Agenda for teleconference Wednesday November 21st, 2007

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 12:14:50 +0000
Message-ID: <4742CFBA.2030208@hpl.hp.com>
To: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
CC: OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>

Ian Horrocks wrote:

>           o Issue 2 revisited: RDF syntax for other "n-ary constructs"? 
> (See [1] and thread.)

That seems to be a different issue from issue 2, but that is perhaps too 


I also note that I think that are differences between us concerning the 
cost of vocab items (particularly in the RDF syntax).

I think many in the OWL Full community see additional cost associated 
with each and every term added, and are unconvinced by motivations such 
as language symmetry and/or strong round-tripping requirements.

OTOH I suspect the OWL Full semantic concerns, which can also motivate 
additional vocab items over-and-above what the DL community would need, 
are unlikely to generate much excitement outside the Full community.
(An example would be the owl:withXMLSchema property in

Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2007 12:15:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:00 UTC