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

Guide: History clarification questions

From: Smith, Michael K <michael.smith@eds.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 12:41:11 -0500
Message-ID: <B8E84F4D9F65D411803500508BE3221410C2E20D@USPLM207>
To: webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>

I am trying to resolve the various history comments.  Once that is done we
can decide whether the section is worth including.  Since I am late to this
history, I suggest those who disagree decide who is the more authoritative
voice.

- Mike

1. OIL ancestor clarification

a. Hendler - "SHOE and Ontobroker were direct contributors to DAML and OIL
respectively."

b. Horrocks = "OIL was NOT based on Ontobroker - it was based on a
combination of
description logic theory and frame syntax, with the latter heavily
influenced by XOL, an XML serialisation of the OKBC Lite knowledge
model."

If b is correct, I need an OKBC Lite citation.

2. MCF as predecessor to RDF

I have the following from Dan Brickley.  Can someone craft the sentence that
describes the MCF contribution to RDF?

> If you do keep a history section, please do acknowledge MCF's 
> role in all this.
> 
> Netscape's submission in 1997:
> 	http://www.w3.org/Submission/1997/8/
> 
> 	http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-MCF-XML/
> 	R.V. Guha (Netscape Communications) <guha@netscape.com>
> 	Tim Bray (Textuality) <tbray@textuality.com>
> 
> preceded by Guha's MCF white page from 1996 while at Apple,
> now online at http://www.guha.com/mcf/wp.html with the old spec
> at http://www.guha.com/mcf/mcf_spec.html

- Mike

Michael K. Smith, Ph.D., P.E.
EDS - Austin Innovation Centre
98 San Jacinto, #500
Austin, TX  78701

* phone: +01-512-404-6683
* mailto:michael.smith@eds.com
Received on Thursday, 26 September 2002 13:41:22 GMT

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