- From: Ian Horrocks <Ian.Horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 14:08:17 +0100
- To: ewallace@cme.nist.gov
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
Evan, Relationships with other W3C groups is a charter "expectation", hence the agenda item. I for one would be more than happy to establish relationships with groups outside W3C. I'm not sure that we will have time to discuss this in tomorrow's teleconf, but I will add an item to the agenda in the expectation that it will be postponed but not forgotten. Ian On 17 Oct 2007, at 16:33, ewallace@cme.nist.gov wrote: > > > A question about relationships to other groups: > I only see W3C groups listed. The OMG Ontology Definition Metamodel > (ODM) specification includes both a metamodel and a UML profile for > OWL as normative parts. Clearly ODM has a dependency on the work of > the OWL wg. But in addition, the OWL 1.1 submission includes a UML- > based > description and a MOF metamodel which creates a functional overlap > in what ODM and the OWL revision may provide. We should plan to talk > about this overlap at some point, and we may as well make the > relationship > between OWL wg and OMG formal since both co-chairs of the ODM > Finalization > Task Force (Elisa Kendall and myself) are already OWL wg members. > > -Evan > > Evan K. Wallace > Manufacturing Systems Integration Division > NIST >
Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2007 13:08:37 UTC