W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > December 2001

Re: UPDATE: initial message concerning syntax

From: Enrico Motta <e.motta@open.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 11:29:12 +0000
Message-Id: <p05100302b8462719f4a0@[212.67.113.158]>
To: Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>, Enrico Motta <e.motta@open.ac.uk>
Cc: pfps@research.bell-labs.com, phayes@ai.uwf.edu, jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com, horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk, mdean@bbn.com, lynn.stein@olin.edu, hendler@cs.umd.edu, connolly@w3.org, www-archive@w3.org
Frank,

I agree with your point that some of daml+oil corresponds exactly to 
standard frame-based representation.  However, if this frame-based 
subset is part of a larger dl-like representation, then I think that 
misconceptions can still arise on the part of non-dl-aware users 
(i.e., my point is not about formal semantics is about the relation 
between the story presented to the user and the underlying behaviour 
of the system).

Enrico

At 12:02 am +0100 19/12/01, Frank van Harmelen wrote:
>Enrico,
>
>As you might guess, I disagree with what you wrote.
>Of course, surface syntax should not give false impressions,
>but I don't think this will be the case here:
>
>Some of the typical DAML+OIL idiom corresonds >*exactly*< with the 
>usual frame-based constructions. (for example the locally defined 
>range-striction on a slot, which I used as example in my msg; same 
>for cardinality constraints; same for "defined"-classes; etc).

>
>Your point about behaviour requires more thinking, I agree:
>
>>  Even when dressed as a frame system a DL will always
>>  behave as a DL (with anonymous classes and automatic
>>  re-classification)
>
>I know that Stefan Decker has been thinking about a restricted 
>semantics of DAML+OIL which would indeed only deal with named 
>classes (for instance to classify instances).
>
>So, in my view, there are two issues, one easy, one hard, both important:
>
>- (easy): define frame-based modelling-idiom as syntactic 
>constructions for DAML+OIL
>- (hard): try to think what DAML+OIL would look like if it only 
>dealt with named classes
>
>Frank.
>    ----
Received on Wednesday, 19 December 2001 06:38:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:17:15 GMT