- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 10:15:21 -0600
- To: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu>
- Cc: webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
> > > 3/ [Peter P-S] don't understand what > > >> Note that it is possible for a revision to change the intended >> meaning of a term without changing any axioms. >> >> is supposed to mean. Is OWL supposed to know about the intended >> meaning of terms in ontologies? If so, how? > >No. The statement was meant to say that only humans can know the >intended meaning of terms. True, and maybe only some humans can. > Therefore, only humans can truly determine >semantic backward-compatibility of terms, That does not follow. Backward compatibility can sometimes be demonstrated even when the intended meanings are unknown. Were it not so, computing would be impossible. > and thus the language needs an >explicit feature to express this. The above seems to imply to me that there should NOT be a language feature to express something that can only be known to humans. At best it would be a comment field, right? Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Thursday, 21 February 2002 11:15:22 UTC