- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:23:42 -0500
- To: Rinke Hoekstra <hoekstra@uva.nl>
- Cc: Elisa F. Kendall <ekendall@sandsoft.com>, OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
On Jan 24, 2008, at 11:16 AM, Rinke Hoekstra wrote: > SKOS is already OWL Full, I believe, so I guess deprecating > deprecation would not really affect users in this case. While it may be currently, I think it is strongly in our interest to ensure that it isn't OWL 1.1 Full and is OWL 1.1 DL. I'm not sure their use of the deprecation vocabulary is a serious problem though - perhaps we could put in a request to have them define their own deprecation vocabulary instead. But we should look at the other areas of OWL Fullness in SKOS and do our best to remediate them (I've done some of this in the past, but haven't had time in a while). Elisa's our Liaison to SWD. Might be worth taking some time to see what the current status of OWL-DL compatibility in SKOS is, and what their thinking on it is, and to perhaps probe them as to their willingness to potentially use a different route for deprecation should we decide to not have it be a builtin. -Alan
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2008 16:23:54 UTC