W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-w3pm@w3.org > June 2008

RE: XG W3pm Scope

From: Bohms, H.M. (Michel) <michel.bohms@tno.nl>
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 15:26:42 +0200
Message-ID: <3B3F3C4E899073459706DF47FCBE44F2012420CB@MAIL04.tsn.tno.nl>
To: "Kendall Grant Clark" <kendall@clarkparsia.com>
Cc: "Henson Graves" <henson.graves@lmco.com>, "public-xg-w3pm" <public-xg-w3pm@w3.org>

Certainly "IW" :)
- at least it's a comfort I am not alone :)
- I do indeed have the feeling the diff. is "far-reaching" but any
material explaining/discusing the implications are welcome to me (CW/OW
is quite clear to me but esp. for the difference between "calculations
on apriori instantiations of classes" versus "instantiations classifying
or not" or more losely (?) "making true" versus "being true" would be
very helpfull)

Michel
 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Kendall Grant Clark [mailto:kendall@clarkparsia.com] 
Sent: 04 June 2008 15:10
To: Bohms, H.M. (Michel)
Cc: Henson Graves; public-xg-w3pm
Subject: RE: XG W3pm Scope

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
This e-mail and its contents are subject to the DISCLAIMER at http://www.tno.nl/disclaimer/email.html
Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2008 13:27:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 4 June 2008 13:27:17 GMT