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

Re: Issue 3.4 - daml:UnambiguousProperty (fwd)

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 08:53:20 -0400 (EDT)
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
cc: <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0206060841410.15712-100000@tux.w3.org>

On Thu, 6 Jun 2002, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:

> From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Issue 3.4 - daml:UnambiguousProperty (fwd)
> Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 08:02:13 -0400 (EDT)
>
> >
> >
> > Re motivating daml:UnambiguousProperty, here are some public but offlist
> > notes I made a little while ago, and which Libby just mentioned.
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 09:34:19 -0400 (EDT)
> > From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
> > To: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
> > Cc: connolly@w3.org, massimo@w3.org, www-archive@w3.org,
> >      libby.miller@bris.ac.uk, Guus Schreiber <schreiber@swi.psy.uva.nl>
> > Subject: Re: Issue 3.4 - daml:UnambiguousProperty
> > Resent-Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 09:35:05 -0400 (EDT)
> > Resent-From: www-archive@w3.org
> >
> >
> >
> > Oops, Guus and Libby's addresses were missing from CC list; resending.
> >
> > imho UnambiguousProperty is the most important thing for WebOnt to get
> > riht, and since there are some subtleties (eg. unambiguity of a property
> > over time)
>
> I am totally confused as to why you would think that WebOnt is concerned
> with time.  Could you please let me know why you think that WebOnt should
> be concerned with the time-varying behaviour of properties?


Because the properties of things vary over time, and we're supposed to be
deploying this language in the World Wide Web. Hence the name.
I understand that giving OWL a proper notion of time/change would be
way too much for v1.0, perhaps ever. Nevertheless, if W3C are to RECommend that
the Web community use OWL vocabs in real life to describe real things in
the World Wide Web, it won't take long before practical use of OWL runs
into situations where the truth about property values change of time.
Maybe this is tutorial/primer material for OWL 1.0 rather than language
fodder. I know my apps that use daml:UnambiguousProperty need to make
stronger assumptions than those licenced by the DAML formal spec; but
maybe that's my problem...

Dan

> > is is important for WebOnt to write down the reason it has
> > this construct. Below is a draft that might be useful for this.
> >
> > cheers,
> >
> > Dan
>
> [...]
>
> Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>
Received on Thursday, 6 June 2002 08:53:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:50 GMT