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

Re: Time.owl

From: David Martin <martin@ai.sri.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 16:23:41 -0700
Message-ID: <3F148CFD.9050208@ai.sri.com>
To: Jos de Bruijn <jos.de-bruijn@uibk.ac.at>
CC: www-ws@w3.org, hobbs@isi.edu

Jos de Bruijn wrote:

>
> Could someone explain to me why a separate time ontology is used here 
> instead of the built-in XML Schema data types?
> To me, it makes no sense to create new concepts that already exist. 

Yes, you are quite right that XMLSchema data types could be used with 
the current version of DAML-S/OWL-S.  The current version mentions time 
only in the most trivial way.  But Time.daml has been kept around 
because there are plans to make more interesting statements about time, 
which would require the use of an ontology.  It is my hope that some 
additional work will be done on this sometime this year, and it will be 
based on the OWL Time ontology being developed by Jerry Hobbs and 
others.  So the simple Time.daml file currently on the DAML-S/OWL-S 
release is really just a placeholder.

Regards,
David Martin

>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jos de Bruijn
>
> Mithun Sheshagiri wrote:
>
>> Hello guys,
>>            Process.owl points to 
>> http://www.ai.sri.com/daml/ontologies/time/Time.owl 
>

As Monika Solanki notes in a subseqent message, this is due to the fact 
that a convertor has been used to convert daml files to owl files.  
Sorry for the confusion; we should have caught that.

Regards,
David Martin

>>
>>
>> This file does not exist at the moment.
>>
>> peace,
>> mithun sheshagiri
>> http://www.cs.umbc.edu/~mits1
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>
Received on Tuesday, 15 July 2003 19:24:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:43 GMT