W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sws-ig@w3.org > November 2004

Re: OWL-S version 1.1 now available

From: Ian Dickinson <ian.dickinson@hp.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 10:22:13 +0000
Message-ID: <419F1AD5.70906@hp.com>
Cc: public-sws-ig@w3.org

Daniel Elenius wrote:
>> * also in section 5.4, there seems to be no syntactic difference 
>> between ControlConstructBag and ControlConstructList, so why not just 
>> make one a sub-class of the other?
> But there is a *semantic* difference, i.e. the bag should not be 
> interpreted as ordered. 
Yes, I understand that such is the intent. I was just pointing out that 
there's no semantic or syntactic difference at the RDF level. In OWL 
terms, the ccBag and ccList classes are co-extensional.  Any semantic 
difference derives from an owl-s -aware processor being programmed to 
recognise those names and treat them specially.

> Then again, it doesn't really hurt to have the two classes, I 
> think.
Perhaps it simply suggests that some refactoring might be indicated. 
There are two needs: to encode sematically meaningful distinctions (like 
duplication or ordering) that *are* relevant to the interpretation of 
the language, and to encode data-structures using the low-level 
machinery of RDF. It may be that these are not as cleanly separated as 
would be nice in a specification document.

Received on Saturday, 20 November 2004 10:22:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:54:13 UTC