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

RE: UFDTF Metamodeling Document

From: Conrad Bock <conrad.bock@nist.gov>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 14:54:36 -0500
To: "'Peter F. Patel-Schneider'" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1af001c832c1$ab3b0d30$b3200681@MEL.NIST.GOV>

Peter, 

 >  > Could you give some examples from the OWL and RDF metamodels?  
 >  
 >  For RDF:

Thanks, these are not comments on the metamodel, which is what we're
concerned with, but I'll forward them to OMG for discussion there (BTW,
the list is odm-ftf@omg.org, which you can also send mail to also).

 >  Well, I'm not sure that a comment along the lines of:
 >  
 >  	This has too many inaccuracies to be accepted.
 >  
 >  would be appreciated. 

That would be true.  :) However, the concrete comments would be.  Bear
in mind it's quite late in the game, it would have been helpful to have
your input with the others during webont.



 >  I have no idea what possible use the RDF and OWL metamodels could be
 >  put to.

Boris put it very well in
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2007Oct/0085.html
where he says it is very useful to have a data storage specification for
the language (his message would make quite a nice ad for OMG,
actually!).  It is important that such a storage specification be
generally agreed if the stored ontologies are to be widely accessible.
It isn't good for W3C and OMG to adopt different data storage
specifications for OWL.

Conrad
Received on Thursday, 29 November 2007 19:55:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:13:27 GMT