- From: Chris Welty <cawelty@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 23:32:33 -0400
- To: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- CC: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>, RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Dave Reynolds wrote: > > Michael Kifer wrote: >>> Michael Kifer wrote: >>>> Following up on the issue of whether RIF needs its own subclassOf >>>> thingie, >>>> I would argue that in order to support exchange of data models >>>> (strongly >>>> argued for by Gary and, as I understood at the last f2f, favored by >>>> Christian) >>> and objected to by me as being out of scope of RIF >> >> Not clear how you determined that. Others seem to feel it is not out >> of scope. > > The chairs were crystal clear at the last f2f that RIF is not supposed > to create yet another W3C data modelling language, it even got written > on the flip chart. <chair> Yes, precisely so. But the other semantic web "modeling languages" (OWL and RDFS) were not designed for interchange (between other languages). RIF's primary design goal is facilitating this interchange. There seems to me to be an argument in favor of providing some minimal way of interchanging class hierarchies without providing another modeling language... However, it is a slippery slope. As we are already seeing. So - I'd rather not call this out of scope just yet. </chair> -Chris -- Dr. Christopher A. Welty IBM Watson Research Center +1.914.784.7055 19 Skyline Dr. cawelty@gmail.com Hawthorne, NY 10532 http://www.research.ibm.com/people/w/welty
Received on Sunday, 19 August 2007 03:32:50 UTC