W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > October 2000

Re: DAML/RDF: a semantics and 2 more syntaxes

From: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:43:13 +0100 (BST)
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
Message-ID: <14826.62048.210549.20551@localhost.localdomain>
On October 14, Dan Connolly writes:


> OK... so it's this level that you're after. I'll try to
> cook up a KIF (or perhaps larch) specification for
> what I think the rest of the DAML vocabulary means.

I think it would be simpler, more useful, and less error prone, if
you/we define a formal mapping from DAML-ONT to OIL. This would be
useful in any case and will allow DAML-ONT to inherit a clear
denotational semantics.

On October 14, Dan Connolly writes:


> > Semantics                       denotational            English
> >                                 complete, unambiguous   partial, ambiguous
> I expect that eventually we can change that DAML entry
> here to "provided by OIL", but I haven't finished
> studying the OIL denotational semantics.

Yes please!

Ian Horrocks, Department of Computer Science,
University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
Tel: +44 161 275 6133  Fax: +44 161 275 6204  Email: horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk
URL: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~horrocks
Received on Monday, 16 October 2000 09:11:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 2 March 2016 11:10:32 UTC