W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > April 2002

Re: [Fwd: RE: LANG: compliance levels]

From: Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 23:21:02 +0200
Message-ID: <3CCC67BE.97B7AF07@cs.vu.nl>
To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
I don't see any reason to deviate from DAML+OIL on this one
(this is one of the few things that DAML+OIL got exactly right:-)

1. Anybody can state additional axioms about any class from anywhere if they so wish.
This is crucial in a web-environment. I agree with Deb that this is rope for users to hang themselves with, so there is work to do for the GUIDE group here.

2. There is a language construct to state that a given set of axioms S1 is "equivalent" to another given set of axioms S2. Either one or both of these may be a class name, thus giving nec&suff conditions for that named class(es). 

Unlike many other language features, I never heard any complaints about this mechanism in DAML+OIL (neither from the language designers nor from the tool builders nor from the ontology builders nor from the ontology users). 

Furthermore, as Ian pointed out, it will be hard to get rid of nec&suff conditions even if you wanted to, since 
C1 subClassOf C2 
C2 subClassOf C1  
already give you this power. 

I would suggest that if it isn't broken, we don't try to fix it.

Received on Sunday, 28 April 2002 17:23:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:56:43 UTC