- From: Kendall Grant Clark <kendall@clarkparsia.com>
- Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 09:10:15 -0400
- To: "Bohms, H.M. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\(Michel\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\)" <michel.bohms@tno.nl>
- Cc: Henson Graves <henson.graves@lmco.com>, public-xg-w3pm <public-xg-w3pm@w3.org>
Excerpts from Bohms, H.M. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\(Michel\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\)'s message of Wed Jun 04 09:05:53 -0400 2008:
> wrt your last point ("hasValue calculation"):
> I have along background in (mostly closed world) modelling stuff like ISO STEP
> EXPRESS, UML, etc.
> This means that sometimes when modelling in RDF(s)/OWL I interprete things
> wrongly or apply things wrongly....(just by habit). I think the assumption that
> "a hasValue should be calculated to result in a valid individual" instead of "a
> check whether an individual HAS a certain value to classify" is typically such
> an example ...
FWIW, this is *the* single biggest hurdle for people to overcome w/r/t using
OWL happily. It's actually pretty complex and has far-reaching implications,
some of which users can ignore.
There is, of course, no right or wrong; sometimes you want closed and
sometimes you want open world semantics. Sometimes you want partially closed
or open worlds, so one thing that's been getting attention lately is
mechanisms for selectively handling this.
I don't yet have a clear sense for where PM is on the (probably multi-valued)
spectrum w/r/t this issue.
Cheers,
Kendall
Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2008 13:10:56 UTC