To the W3C Ontology Working Group - In section 3.2., Ontology evolution, of Requirements for a Web Ontology Language, you state "An important issue of revision is whether or not documents that commit to one version of an ontology are compatible with those that commit to another. Both compatible and incompatible revisions should be allowed, but it should be possible to distinguish between the two. Note that it is possible for a revision to change the intended meaning of a term without changing its formal description.. Thus determining semantic backwards-compatibility requires more than a simple comparison of term descriptions. As such, the ontology author needs to be able to indicate such changes explicitly. " I don't get it. How can the meaning of a term within a universe of discourse change, yet its formal description remain the same? Isn't that what ontologies are for - to encode meaning? Unless you intend that "formal description" simply refers to the human readable documentation comments within the ontology, and not the encoded semantics of the term. If so, that is not clear from the above. Please clarify. Thank you, Hal Noyes Oracle DBA Howard Systems InternationalReceived on Monday, 18 March 2002 15:47:08 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:19:13 GMT