W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > January 2008

Re: proposal to close (as RESOLVED) ISSUE-90 (class and property deprecation)

From: Rinke Hoekstra <hoekstra@uva.nl>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 17:38:56 +0100
Cc: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu>, Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, public-owl-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <9C3B4C5B-CFE5-415F-B38A-236CBA8C136F@uva.nl>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>

Hi Jeremy, others,

It was certainly not my intention to suggest that backwards  
compatibility is only important in the context of DL, nor did I want  
to downplay the importance of OWL Full. If my comments seemed to  
suggest this, I apologise.

Best,

	Rinke

On 25 jan 2008, at 17:04, Jeremy Carroll wrote:

>
> Rinke Hoekstra wrote:
>> and are particularly concerned about their use in combination with  
>> DL semantics...
>
> [and in a different message]
> >SKOS is already OWL Full, I believe, so I guess deprecating  
> deprecation
> > would not really affect users in this case.
>
> The member submission documents are written in terms of OWL DL.
>
> However, the charter of this group is about OWL (both DL and Full).
>
> If what OWL Full people do doesn't matter to this group, then we  
> should be applying for a change in charter - to work on DL only.
>
> Those people who would want to be part of such group (not me for  
> instance), would then need to work out what sort of relationship  
> they would want with other people in the OWL world. But  
> participating in this group is about looking at the bigger picture,  
> not just an OWL DL perspective.
>
> So - in terms of the two comments - the greater the difference we  
> make between OWL DL and OWL Full the harder we make it for users of  
> either set of technologies to revise their decisions and migrate.
>
> So for users who use deprectaion and currently are using OWL Full,  
> as many as people in this group seem to know, these users are making  
> a serious mistake, and in a couple of years they will realise the  
> error of their ways and decide to migrate to an OWL DL solution.
>
> The more decisions we make that create divergence between OWL DL and  
> OWL Full, and the more we ignore what people in the OWL Full world  
> are doing when we think about the OWL DL design, the more difficult  
> such migrations will be, and the more this group will have failed to  
> meet its charter objective of:
>
>  produc[ing] a W3C Recommendation that refines and extends OWL
>
> Jeremy

-----------------------------------------------
Drs. Rinke Hoekstra

Email: hoekstra@uva.nl    Skype:  rinkehoekstra
Phone: +31-20-5253499     Fax:   +31-20-5253495
Web:   http://www.leibnizcenter.org/users/rinke

Leibniz Center for Law,          Faculty of Law
University of Amsterdam,            PO Box 1030
1000 BA  Amsterdam,             The Netherlands
-----------------------------------------------
Received on Friday, 25 January 2008 16:39:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 25 January 2008 16:39:04 GMT