W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > January 2003

RE: ISSUE 5.2 Language Compliance Levels - proposed clarification

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 09:13:11 +0100
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BHEGLCKMOHGLGNOKPGHDEEABCBAA.jjc@hpl.hp.com>


OK - I'll rephrase the proposal.

(I was just trying to do the minimal change on the current resolution
closing the issue).

How about:
PROPOSE
  - to reopen issue 5.2
  - to retract the endorsement of existing OWL lite language subset.
  -  to remove modality = complete from the OWL Lite Class Axioms in the
Abstract Syntax
  -  to endorse the modified OWL Lite language subset
  -  to close issue 5.2

This is more in keeping with seeing AS&S as the definitive doc.

Jeremy


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider [mailto:pfps@research.bell-labs.com]
> Sent: 24 January 2003 01:07
> To: jjc@hpl.hp.com
> Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: ISSUE 5.2 Language Compliance Levels - proposed
> clarification
>
>
> From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
> Subject: ISSUE 5.2 Language Compliance Levels - proposed clarification
> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 21:27:50 +0100
>
> [...]
>
> >   - to endorse the existing OWL Lite language subset in the OWL
> Overview of
> > 20 Jan 2003
> >
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Jan/att-0327
> /01-OWLOverview
>
> [...]
>
> Hmm.
>
> To endorse the language described in this document requires:
>
> For OWL Lite:
> - prohibit owl:DatatypeProperty and owl:ObjectProperty
> - not use datatypes (yet)
> - not use owl:AllDifferent
> - allow owl:inverseOf, owl:TransitiveProperty, owl:SymmetricProperty,
>   and owl:InverseFunctionalProperty on any property
> - apply restrictions to classes (somehow)
>
> For OWL DL:
> - prohibit owl:DatatypeProperty and owl:ObjectProperty
> - require that all properties belong to either owl:DatatypeProperty and
>   owl:ObjectProperty
> - not use datatypes (yet)
> - not use owl:AllDifferent
> - not allow owl:oneOf for data values
> - allow owl:inverseOf, owl:TransitiveProperty, owl:SymmetricProperty,
>   and owl:InverseFunctionalProperty on any property
> - apply restrictions to classes (somehow)
>
> I do not think that these are good ideas.
>
> Peter F. Patel-Schneider
> Bell Labs Research
> Lucent Technologies
>
Received on Friday, 24 January 2003 03:13:25 GMT

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