W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-rules@w3.org > November 2003

Re: Rules WG -- draft charter -- NAF

From: Stefan Decker <stefan@ISI.EDU>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:44:30 +0000
Message-Id: <5.2.1.1.2.20031118134320.05bba380@nitro.isi.edu>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: www-rdf-rules@w3.org

At 01:02 PM 11/18/2003, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>From: Stefan Decker <stefan@ISI.EDU>
>Subject: Re: Rules WG -- draft charter -- NAF
>Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 12:15:47 +0000
>
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > as far as I understand the discussion there are different issues:
> >
> > 1) Reasoning with the Closed World Assumption on a given graph
> > 2) Naming a given graph.
> > 3) Collecting (or completing) a graph (data transclusion)
> >
> > I think we all agree that doing 1) is easy.
>
>[...]
>
>Not so fast.  What if it is difficult to determine just what objects
>(belonging to a particular class) exist?  Then what does closing (a class)
>mean?
Free your mind! (from semantics ;-).
I was talking about the graph - not the semantics.
Closed World applied to Description Logic is a different story.

Best,
         Stefan






>peter



--
http://www.isi.edu/~stefan
Received on Tuesday, 18 November 2003 08:44:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 2 March 2016 11:10:15 UTC