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

Re: Moving forward

From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 11:37:46 -0500
Message-ID: <00b501c1cd08$e885cd80$0301a8c0@ne.client2.attbi.com>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Peter,

Could you bear with me for the moment. Much of this discussion has been in a
technical language which I am at best partially familiar with. When you say
"Pat's solution" which particular response to the interchange contains this
"solution". I presume that since we are still discussion this, that you have
concerns about this. Is this "solution" acceptable, and in your opinion what
are the downsides? I am still having trouble understanding what the
"informal" changes are and how to evaluate the "cost" of such changes.

Jonathan

>
> > Peter,
> >
> > > A third way to go would be to
> > > 1/ give up on a theory of classes
> > > This *would* result in a viable solution.  The change to DAML+OIL
would be
> > > very small, formally, but, informally
> > > 2/ the role of classes would change
> >
> > Could you elaborate? What are the implications? That is to say, this
seems
> > attractive but perhaps I am missing something obvious, or perhaps I am
> > misreading "give up on _a_ theory of classes" which seems to suggest
that
> > _another_ theory of classes can be used. Isn't a "very small" formal
change
> > what we are looking for?
> >
> > Jonathan
>
> Well this would be something like Pat's solution.
>
> peter
>
>
Received on Saturday, 16 March 2002 10:56:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:48 GMT