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

Re: ISSUE 5.6 - daml:imports as magic syntax

From: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 16:13:19 -0400
Message-ID: <3D7FA3DF.3B9E56F5@cse.lehigh.edu>
To: Tim Finin <finin@cs.umbc.edu>
CC: www-webont-wg@w3.org

Tim,

I believe that you have done it correctly. My personal opinion is that
when you refer to classes and properties in a foreign ontology without
importing it then technically you should not include the axioms from the
foreign ontology when reasoning. Of course, this is almost always an
error, or the result of someone like Dan who doesn't believe in imports.
So we may decide to be lenient on this one and say that there is an
implicit imports of any ontology that includes a class or property that
is referenced. I'm not wild about that idea, but could live with it.
Either way, we need to make the expected behavior clear in our
semantics.

Jeff


Tim Finin wrote:
> 
> Dan Connolly wrote:
> > ...Does anybody else have software that pays
> > any attention to daml:imports whatsoever? ...
> 
> The JESS based reasoner we are using processes
> daml:imports assertions by loading, if necessary,
> the target ontologies.  We've assumed that this
> was the reasonable thing to do.  We're still not sure
> what to do if one refers to classes and properties in
> a foreign ontology that is not imported.
Received on Wednesday, 11 September 2002 16:13:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:52 GMT