W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rule-workshop-discuss@w3.org > August 2005

Subject: 3 - Addressing NAF

From: Dieter Fensel <dieter.fensel@deri.org>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 17:33:32 +0200
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20050823173301.060830f0@mail1.uibk.ac.at>
To: public-rule-workshop-discuss@w3.org

Dear Jim,

I think we agree here. Neither so-called open world assumption or so-called
closed world assumption scale on a world wide scale when taken naively.
OWL-and its so-called open world assumption brakes on world wide scale
since simply inhering artificial equalities whenever a new fact is met 
somewhere
on the web that interacts with some (value or cardinality) restrictions. This
is roughly as reticules as to infer the truth of negated knowledge under NAF
simply because your crawler failed to find the positive fact. Inference on
the web whether it is called open or closed world needs the notion of scope.

And I agree, if I had worked in their marketing department I would have
neither called it CLOSED world nor negation as FAILURE. Scoped negation
and explicit contextualization sound much nicer.

	-- dieter
----------------------------------------------------------------
Dieter Fensel, http://www.deri.org/
Tel.: +43-512-5076485/8
Received on Tuesday, 23 August 2005 15:36:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:16:23 GMT