- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 16:26:23 -0400
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
- Message-Id: <08D63883-3D1C-4B17-85CF-FDF4DB8018FA@gmail.com>
On Jul 16, 2008, at 4:08 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >> The part that I was specifically trying to enable was reasoning >> within >> the annotations, for example to allow for domain and ranges on >> annotation properties. This is the part that I didn't see how to >> manage >> comfortably within a single file. > > > Why not? In particular, why not use something analogous to the > process > from the paper you cite? I was worried that was a lot more mechanism, and that given where we were in the process, the desire to get something in to this release of OWL, and the desire to keep to schedule and move quickly towards last call, the amount of work associated with doing that might have been considered too much. I didn't want to have proposing that much change put the possibility of getting *something* in this space out of reach. In addition there were two technical details which I wasn't sure were covered by the paper. The first is annotations on annotations. I did want to make sure some version of this is possible as I am aware of several use cases in current projects that need it. The second was the issue of how to view that proposal from an RDF point of view. I did note that the reification of the axioms and associated ontology of OWL axioms proposed by the paper seems to not be incompatible with what I've proposed- in the sense that I can see how one could script the creation of the reified axioms, and then import that into the second file. However, I like that paper and its approach and if the WG were wiling to seriously consider what it proposes I'd certainly support that. -Alan
Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2008 20:27:02 UTC