W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > July 2008

Re: Issue-114

From: Rinke Hoekstra <hoekstra@uva.nl>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 13:54:46 +0200
Cc: OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <66FCD620-7911-4F37-8894-B4664E94FE9E@uva.nl>
To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>

On 2 jul 2008, at 13:19, Bijan Parsia wrote:
> I propose closing this issue with no change.

+1

-Rinke


>
> We've clearly seen that there is user demand for this feature  
> (stated, clearly, by two users).
>
> No technical problem has been raised.
>
> Implementations already support it.
>
> I'll go further and say I don't see, absent a technical issue, this  
> support being removed. I will certainly oppose removing supporting  
> class/property punning in all the tools I am connected with  
> (including a validator I'm writing). Since class/property punning  
> will be in OWL Full, we'll be back in the mess of having a pointless  
> restriction making some documents nominally OWL Full even though its  
> trivial to support in OWL DL. That's a *losing* position for a tool  
> vendor. Thus, I think this restriction will be, functionally  
> speaking, a dead letter.
>
> Thus, in the absence of a concrete technical motivation, I think we  
> should close it. Indeed, absent some evidence of significant WG  
> support, I think we shouldn't expend more WG resource on it.  
> Obviously, continued scrutiny is warranted, as always, but I don't  
> think the current discussion has passed the bar yet.
>
> I would support putting back object/data punning, for that matter.  
> The objections there were primarily motivated by syntactic problems  
> in *one* (important) serialization. That's unfortunate, not happy  
> making.
>
> Cheers,
> Bijan.

-----------------------------------------------
Drs. Rinke Hoekstra

Email: hoekstra@uva.nl    Skype:  rinkehoekstra
Phone: +31-20-5253499     Fax:   +31-20-5253495
Web:   http://www.leibnizcenter.org/users/rinke

Leibniz Center for Law,          Faculty of Law
University of Amsterdam,            PO Box 1030
1000 BA  Amsterdam,             The Netherlands
-----------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2008 11:55:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:05 UTC