- From: Danny Ayers <danny666@virgilio.it>
- Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 18:53:31 +0200
- To: Thomas Baker <thomas.baker@izb.fraunhofer.de>
- Cc: SW Best Practices <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
[[ The goal of this Task Force is to describe best practice for declaring and managing terms and term sets (vocabularies) for use in a Semantic Web environment. ]] One of the first questions a vocabulary author is likely to ask when considering how to declare a term is "rdfs:Class or owl:Class", or to put it another way, "shall I use OWL Full (RDF+S), DL or Lite?" I was wondering whether this question will be in scope for [VM], and if not, how on earth will you avoid it? I realise 'cleaning up the mess' has been put on hold as far as [WRLD] is concerned [1], but there is no need for anyone to commit to advice pointing towards any (sub-)language exclusively. However there should be information available on the implications of any choice based on known facts. The mess won't clean itself up, quite the opposite if people are implementing without at least some knowledge of the relative strengths/merits of the alternatives. Cheers, Danny. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2004May/0057.html PS. Jim said "if anyone wants to argue me out of the above by volunteering to actually edit a document" - rather than let it be swept under the carpet, worst case I'll volunteer myself. -- Raw http://dannyayers.com
Received on Saturday, 12 June 2004 12:54:41 UTC