W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webont-comments@w3.org > September 2002

Re: Comments on the OWL-Lite draft

From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 20:27:52 -0400
Message-Id: <p0511170eb99b033f1eaa@[10.0.1.2]>
To: "Bob MacGregor" <macgregor@ISI.EDU>, <public-webont-comments@w3.org>
At 2:42 PM -0700 9/3/02, Bob MacGregor wrote:
>Recommendations:
>
>(1) Toss out cardinalities altogether in OWL-Lite.  FunctionalProperty already
>covers the MAX1 case.  Add a 'RequiredProperty' property to cover MIN1.
>Invent a third property to cover MAX0.
>
>(2) State upfront whether or not OWL-Lite is intended to be
>upward compatible with RDF(S).
>
>(3) Toss out TransitiveProperty and SymmetricProperty.  They add little
>if any value, and make things harder to implement.
>
>(4) Forget about OWL-Heavy (for now; maybe forever).

Bob, I'll let the editors respond to the specific comments, this 
latter is definitely an issue the group will consider - it's already 
in our issue list (i.e. whether to have levels or just "heavy" or 
just lite)

>
>Question:
>
>What happened to 'first' and 'rest'?  The 'bag' stuff in RDF is hideous.
>If 'first' and 'rest' clash with some other properties from a computability
>standpoint, consider eliminating those other properties.

the RDF Core WG has announced that they intend to provide a 
collection parsetype similar to the one used in DAML+OIL (i.e. first 
and rest) -- we currently intend to use their solution to closed 
sets, at the time we wrote these documents we didn't have details of 
their solution.

-- 
Professor James Hendler				  hendler@cs.umd.edu
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  240-731-3822 (Cell)
http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler
Received on Tuesday, 3 September 2002 20:27:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:43:27 GMT