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

Re: proposal for working on the ontology language

From: Leo Obrst <lobrst@mitre.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 18:30:48 -0500
Message-ID: <3C169728.BA609679@mitre.org>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
CC: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Peter,

Although not formalized, I am thinking of Protege (not that it's
modifiable, you can only add consistently defined new meta-classes). I
also think of CLOS, again as mostly an unformalized language.

"Peter F. Patel-Schneider" wrote:
> 
> From: Leo Obrst <lobrst@mitre.org>
> Subject: Re: proposal for working on the ontology language
> Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 18:14:42 -0500
> 
> [...]
> 
> > I also note that there is no meta level to DAML+OIL and I think that was
> > a conscious choice, no?, though I don't know the history of that
> > decision. Sometimes having a modifiable meta level is a very good thing
> > (future language extensions, e.g.)
> >
> > Leo
> 
> I would be very interested in hearing of cases where a modifiable meta
> level was actually used.  I wouild be even more interested in hearing of
> such cases that also involved a logical formalism.
> 
> peter

-- 
_____________________________________________
Dr. Leo Obrst		The MITRE Corporation
mailto:lobrst@mitre.org Intelligent Information Management/Exploitation
Voice: 703-883-6770	7515 Colshire Drive, M/S W640
Fax: 703-883-1379       McLean, VA 22102-7508, USA
Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2001 18:31:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:46 GMT