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

RE: A proposal for ISSUE-104 (built-in vocabulary)

From: Conrad Bock <conrad.bock@nist.gov>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 09:08:26 -0400
To: "'Boris Motik'" <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <013e01c8cbc4$3c4f07e0$b3200681@MEL.NIST.GOV>


 > In general, I strongly support putting all of built-in vocabulary
 > "off limits" in OWL 2, without any exceptions.

Do you mean for OWL 2 DL or all of OWL 2?

My concern is existing tools successfully reason with subclasses of
owl:Class and I believe with subclasses of properties also (this was
discussed on the list a while back).  This capability is critical to
specifying domain specific languages, and metamodeling in general.
Would your proposal mean these tools are not OWL 2 compliant?

Received on Wednesday, 11 June 2008 13:09:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:41:48 UTC