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

Re: WOWG: agenda Aug 15 telecon

From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 09:01:09 -0400
Message-Id: <p05111707b98155a3de54@[]>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org

At 8:28 AM -0400 8/15/02, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>From: Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>
>Subject: Re: WOWG: agenda Aug 15 telecon
>Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 13:58:37 +0200
>>  Further to my summary of the contributions to public comments list,
>>  two new messages arrived today, both of which are also relevant to the
>>  semantics discussion also on the agenda for today:
>>  Message [1] points out a bug in the DAML+OIL spec that we are about to be
>>  bitten by as well if we don't take care. (Essentially the current DAML+OIL
>>  spec of sameClassAs forces its arguments to be of type daml:Class,
>  > even if without that statement they would only be of type rdfs:Class).

To the best of my recollection, the discussion of the precise 
differences between daml:class and rdfs:class, which seems to carry 
over into our current decision-making and issues, was discussed in 
the DAML joint committee, and not really in this WG -- I've looked 
through the archives and seen many references to owl:class being 
different than rdfs:class, but I cannot find a message that precisely 
describes the differences -- can someone either point the WG to such 
a message (or import one from joint-committee WG archives) or write a 
summary.  From our own discussions, it is not clear to me what is 
being offered as a reason not to simply drop owl:class and use 
rdfs:class (or just make them equivalent if we resolve the open issue 
to have everything be owl:)

Professor James Hendler				  hendler@cs.umd.edu
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  240-731-3822 (Cell)
Received on Thursday, 15 August 2002 09:01:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:56:46 UTC