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

Re: ADMIN: Agenda/Logistics - Oct 31, 2002 telecon

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 13:40:49 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20021031.134049.130346603.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: hendler@cs.umd.edu
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org

Given that we didn't get around to the semantics document, here is what I
was going to bring up today.

peter



Points with respect to the New Semantics Document

- Move forward to make this a WG document?

- Organization
  - Introduction
  - Abstract Syntax
  - Direct Model-Theoretic Semantics
  - Mapping to RDF Syntax
  - RDFS-Compatible Model-Theoretic Semantics
    - Commonalities, Fast OWL, Large OWL
  - Correspondence between Abstract OWL and Fast OWL (Informative)
  * What else is needed?
  * What should be removed?

- Stances on Open Issues
   - 4.4 - Extra Logical Feature Set - only imports
         - annotations - easy to handle in abstract syntax
		       - harder in RDF syntax (and not yet done)
   - 4.6 - equivalentTo - no equivalentTo anywhere
	   - sameIndividualAs carries very similar meaning in Large OWL
	   * I believe that this treatment is a basis for closing the issue
   - 5.5 - Lists are handled directly, and in a minimal fashion
	   - I believe that it works in Fast OWL
	   * I believe that this treatment is a basis for closing the issue
   - 5.6 - imports - only partly handled
	   - easy to handle in abstract syntax, as in my email message
	   - harder in RDF syntax (and not yet done)
   - 5.9 - malformed restrictions
	   - currently different from DAML+OIL
	     - a restriction with two onProperties causes the properties to
	       be identified (as if there was a samePropertyAs axiom)
	   - should this be changed back to the DAML+OIL situation
	     - a restriction with multiple onProperties or other properties
	       implies an equality between the satisfying sets of individuals
           * can go either way, but the change from DAML+OIL requires a decision
   - 5.19 - classes as instances 
	    - allowed in Large OWL, forbidden in Fast OWL
	    * this is in accordance with the direction agreed on at the F2F

   - 5.7 - no datatype range constructs
   - 5.8 - datatypes handled in a similar manner to current RDF proposal
   - 5.13 - internet media type - no stance
   - 5.14 - ontology versioning - no solution
   - 5.17 - XML presentation syntax - not relevant
   - 5.18 - unique names assumption - no solution

WARNING:  I will be making proposals based on this document.  
Received on Thursday, 31 October 2002 13:40:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:53 GMT