Re: ISSUE 5.6 - daml:imports as magic syntax

• From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
• Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 12:26:54 -0400 (EDT)
• To: connolly@w3.org
• Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
• Message-Id: <20020910.122654.11791725.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Subject: Re: ISSUE 5.6 - daml:imports as magic syntax
Date: 10 Sep 2002 11:22:22 -0500

> 
> short version: please let's drop daml:imports altogether.
> 
> Elaboration:
> 
> I don't have any software that notices
> whether daml:imports is there or not.
> (well, it's treated like any other property,
> but I have never built nor used any applications
> that make use of that propoerty).
> Hence, I almmost never put it in my data files.
> 
> Does anybody else have software that pays
> any attention to daml:imports whatsoever?
> 
> Is daml:imports observable from a testing perspective?
> Are there any conceivable daml:imports tests that
> a piece of software could fail?

[...]

A full treatment of daml:imports would definitely have testable
consequences.

For example, suppose the URI foo pointed to an OWL KB that entailed x, then
the OWL KB

	Ontology ( imports(foo) )

would also entail x.

peter

Received on Tuesday, 10 September 2002 12:27:04 UTC