Re: [LC Response] To Frank van Harmelen Re: Request for explicit URI's for language profiles

I am disappointed by the WG's answer.

I feel that you choose to abandon an obvious solution that would have 
worked most of the time because there are obscure cases where it would break.

I don't understand why the behaviourof tools to the possible incorrectness 
of tags needs to stop the WG from defining such tags. The WG could simply 
leave open the response of tools in the case where an ontology doesn't 
match the stated expressivity. I do not see why that would preclude the 
definition of some mechanism to make such statements, and at least give 
tools the choice of whether to believe the tag or to profile-check the 
ontology for themselves. You now force tools to do it the hard way, since 
that's the only way there is.

Your comment that users can always get together and figure something out 
between themselves is weak. The whole point of W3C recommendations is that 
"users figuring something out for themselves" does not always lead to 
workable results. (I will refrain from making the obvious comment on your 
phrase that WG's should work on the basis of a body of practice...)

Given the above, I'm disappointed with the WG's response,
but will leave the matter rest.

Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl              http://www.cs.vu.nl/~frankh
Department of AI, Faculty of Sciences,  Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
de Boelelaan 1081a, 1081HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
tel (+31)-20-598 7731/7483 fax (+31)-84-221 4294

-- 
Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl		http://www.cs.vu.nl/~frankh
Working on the Large Knowledge Collider	http://www.LarKC.eu

Received on Wednesday, 25 February 2009 21:32:23 UTC