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

Re: OWL semantics

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Aug 2002 09:10:41 -0400
To: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <20020806091041D.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>

From: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Subject: Re: OWL semantics
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 15:02:45 +0200

> [...]
> 
> > However, what does that have to do with proving that a large number of
> > axioms (say, about 140) are correct with respect to a model theory, or even
> > that they capture the meaning of a complex language (such as OWL)?  To
> > prove the former requires considerable work - work that can build on
> > similar efforts in the past, but still new work.  To show the latter also
> > requires considerable work - work of a very different kind, but still
> > work.  Will this work have to be done before the WG is finished?  Who will
> > do it?
> 
> I don't see an alternative to avoid the work
> I would even recommend that we have many, many more
> such attempts as http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/ontAx.n3
> 
> -- ,
> Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/

If we don't produce an axiomatization, then we don't need to have this work
done.

Simple.

peter
Received on Tuesday, 6 August 2002 09:10:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:51 GMT