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

Re: Proposed response to Ken Laskey

From: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 11:20:12 -0400
Message-ID: <3F1D562C.78A86CA@cse.lehigh.edu>
To: ewallace@cme.nist.gov
CC: www-webont-wg@w3.org

Done in the editor's draft:

http://www.cse.lehigh.edu/~heflin/webont/reqdoc/index.html

Jeff

ewallace@cme.nist.gov wrote:
> 
> Jim Hendler's proposed response to Ken Laskey included the following:
> >>
> >>  While OWL in its present form does not intrinsically support such
> >>  probablistic or conditional associations useful in real semantic queries,
> >>  application-specific semantics could be encoded in OWL to support such
> >>  functionality.
> >>  </comment>
> >
> >Actually, the use case was talking about defeasible inheritance
> >reasoning, not probability. Although probability can be clearly of use
> >in some use cases, the working group did not consider it an important
> >requirement, although support for probabilistic information is implied
> >by Requirement R12. Attaching Information to Statements. However,
> >you are right that the "typically" is misleading here, and therefore
> >we will change this to read
> >"...a `Late Georgian chest of drawers', in the absence of other
> >information, would be assumed to be `made of mahogany.'  This
> >knowledge ... "
> >which we agree will be less misleading.
> 
> It may be too late to add, but I thought that Jeff had agreed to
> specifically add mention of defeasible inheritance reasoning in the
> "Default property value" objective in the Requirements document.  Is there
> a problem with making this change?
> 
> -Evan
Received on Tuesday, 22 July 2003 11:20:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:01 GMT