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

Re: OWL Lite semantics

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:12:44 -0600
Message-Id: <p05111b42ba1be71c027f@[10.0.100.86]>
To: Deborah McGuinness <dlm@ksl.Stanford.EDU>
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org

>Given the short time to get to our documents out, I think we would 
>be best off if
>we used our email message time towards making proposals that we 
>think are likely to
>help the group reach agreements that are operational.
>I think the line of explicit and implicit description logic bashing

OK, OK, calm down. I only made a passing remark, and I tried to say 
that it wasn't meant to start a row; but nevertheless it was, I 
think, worth making in the context: there was a genuine confusion 
being caused by the DL/logic distinction, and it was germane to the 
topic.

(I have to say, you DL folk are *extraordinarily* touchy and 
defensive. Particularly the ones from Bell Labs. )

>is
>     - unproductive (it does not make sense at this point to start 
>over with another
>foundation for OWL at this late date

You speak here, I take it, as the person who is planning to produce 
an 'axiomatic semantics' for OWL, ie a translation of OWL into logic?

But I didn't in any case for a moment mean to suggest that we should 
be changing anything, only to express regret that we didn't do things 
better in the first place.

Pat
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola              			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501           				(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ai.uwf.edu	          http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
s.pam@ai.uwf.edu   for spam
Received on Tuesday, 10 December 2002 14:12:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:55 GMT