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

Issues List updated

From: Smith, Michael K <michael.smith@eds.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 12:56:41 -0500
Message-ID: <B8E84F4D9F65D411803500508BE322140E7CEE78@USPLM207>
To: www-webont-wg@w3.org

Based on the last 2 teleconference logs and this weeks meeting.

Below is a summary of changes.

- Mike

Michael K. Smith
EDS Austin Innovation Centre
98 San Jacinto, #500
Austin, TX 78701
512 404-6683

============================================================================
====
ISSUES FROM : LOG WebOnt Telcon May 30th (Draft)
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002May/0287.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Issue 4.5-InverseOf - James Hendler - Apr 19, 2002 - OPEN
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#4.5-InverseOf

Proposed resolution by Dan Connoly:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002May/0264.html

Ian: Description seems to involve UniquelyIdentifyingProperty often with
respect to Datatypes.

Proposal is ammended in resolution 5.1 when used with datatypes still open,
elsewise close.

Closed in favor. Closing text will be online. Resolved.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Issue 5.11-hasClass/ToClass-names - Jim Hendler - 20 May 2002 - OPEN
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#5.11-hasClass/ToClass-na
mes

People seem have difficulty with those names. asking for more understandable
names.

No comments on list.

Ian: New document does propose completely new names, i.e.

 toClass (Existential) -> RANGE
 hasClass --> REQUIRED

Example:
 toClass.  all your siblings are people.
 hasClass. you have a sibling that is a person.

Guus: Range might add to the confusion as it is already used otherwise
in RDFS.

DanC takes nominations for 3 days. Will organize votes.

DanC is issue owner.

============================================================================
====
ISSUES FROM : Notes for 6/6 until 1:10 (Log)
<a
href="http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Jun/0055.html">M
inutes</a>
<a
href="http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Jun/0079.html">C
orrections</a>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Issue 1.1 Variables
Issue: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#1.1-Variables

Proposal to close.
Proposal:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Jun/0006.html

Resolution: closed issue.  None opposed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Issue 2.1 URI naming of instances
Issue:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#2.1-URI-naming-of-instan
ces

Proposal to close 
Proposal:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002May/0255.html

Status: No comments raised on mailing list

Discussion: DanC thinks this is related to pointing to parts of an XML 
Schema element.  PFPS is "not unhappy" with the proposal.  JeffH asked if 
an update to requirements doc is needed, the answer seemed to be "no." 
(JeffH undoubtedly "not unhappy" about that)

Resolution: closed issue.  None opposed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Issue 2.3 Adding Properties to Other Classes
Issue:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#2.3-Adding-Properties-to
-Other-Classes

Proposal to close.
Proposal:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002May/0256.html

Status: Wording changes proposed by Jeff Heflin in 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002May/0268.html

New Proposal: CLOSE with amended wording (per Jeff msg):

Our Working group has decided to use RDF/XML as our exchange
framework and that the semantics of our documents will be carried by
the triple store corresponding to this document (see resolutions of 
second face to face meeting). The basic RDF model [1] allows 
documents to refer to and extend the resources defined in other 
documents.

Discussion: DanC wanted a test case, for each feature there should be one.

Resolution: Closed issue.  None opposed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Issue 2.4 - Enumerated Classes (daml:oneOf)
Issue:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#2.4-Enumerated-Classes

Proposal to close
Proposal:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002May/0257.html

Status: No discussion on WG.

Discussion: DanC opposed to closing issue.  Ian expressed "no opinion"
on closing the issue, merely posted some information (see
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Jun/0016.html).
Ian will send a an example of what he meant for the benefit of
smaller-brained mammals.  Dan will reconsider a test case posted by
Jos.

Resolution: None.  Issue still open.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Issue 3.1 - Local Restrictions
Issue:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#3.1-Local-Restrictions

Proposal to close 
proposal:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002May/0259.html

status: No discussion on mailing list.

Discussion: DanC says this is necessary to meet the cardinality 
requirement.

Resultion: closed.  None opposed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Issue 3.3 (Daml:DisjointFrom) from issues list
Issue: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#3.3-DisjointFrom

Proposal to eradicate
Proposal:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002May/0261.html

Status: Mike Dean has suggested a change, and closing text in:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002May/0262.html

New proposal: CLOSE with Mike Dean's wording

Discussion: DanC wants a test case for all features.  PFPS doesn't think 
absence of test cases should interfere with closing an issue.  DanC 
disagrees, but not strongly enough to do the test case.

Resolution: closed.  None opposed (strongly enough).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Issue 3.4 daml:UnambiguousProperty
Issue:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#3.4-UnambiguousProperty

Proposal to close 
Proposal:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002May/0260.html

Status: DanC points out a missed fact:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002May/0272.html

New proposal: CLOSE with amended wording:

daml:UnambiguousProperty is motivated by the "cardinality constraints"
requirement in http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/#section-requirements.
No one has advocated its removal and there does seem to be consensus
it is a desirable feature.  It is provided for in DAML+OIL and will be
provided in OWL.

Discussion: DanC thinks related to the cardinality requirement.  Needs to 
be renamed.  FrankvH offered to raise the renaming as a new issue. DanC 
believed more expedient to add renaming as part of the issue. 

Resolution: Issue left open.  FrankvH to own issue and add a discussion of 
renaming.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Issue 4.8 Trust and Ontology
Issue:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#4.8-Trust-and-Ontology

Proposal to POSTPONE 
Proposal: This issue was raised by a comment to public-webont-comments:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/2002Apr/0005.html

The issue is an important one, but beyond the scope of this WG.
Someone should take the ACTION to write this up for the issues
document.

Discussion:  Issue needs an owner.  Jim responded to the outside poster 
citing wording in the requirements document that this is important, but 
outside our scope.  DanC was happy with this.  What trust means was 
discussed briefly.  Most agreed it was out of scope.  Evan and Laurent 
objected initially to closing the issue.  Evan thought there are some 
important issues regarding trust we should allow in the language.  JimH 
said that the languages allows for "tags it doesn't understand" and that 
groups of users can agree amongst themselves to use certain tags to 
represent trust, since RDF lets us refer to expressions themselves and say 
things about them.  Laurent raised, I believe, the idea of confidence 
values as a part of the language.  Jim seemed to convince him that "saying 
things about ontologies" was enough, or that more was outside our scope.

Resolution: Closed issue.  JimH will own it.  None opposed.

============================================================================
====
ISSUES FROM : Agenda, June 13
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Jun/0088.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Issue 4.5 Inverse resolved 30May (see above)
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002May/0287.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----I
Issue 5.11 ISSUE hasClass/ToClass-names (see above)
OPEN, with DanC is issue owner, 30May

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
4.8 Trust and Ontology resolved 6Jun. (see above)
Received on Friday, 14 June 2002 13:56:51 GMT

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