- From: Dieter Fensel <dieter.fensel@deri.org>
- Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 17:33:32 +0200
- To: public-rule-workshop-discuss@w3.org
Dear Jim, I think we agree here. Neither so-called open world assumption or so-called closed world assumption scale on a world wide scale when taken naively. OWL-and its so-called open world assumption brakes on world wide scale since simply inhering artificial equalities whenever a new fact is met somewhere on the web that interacts with some (value or cardinality) restrictions. This is roughly as reticules as to infer the truth of negated knowledge under NAF simply because your crawler failed to find the positive fact. Inference on the web whether it is called open or closed world needs the notion of scope. And I agree, if I had worked in their marketing department I would have neither called it CLOSED world nor negation as FAILURE. Scoped negation and explicit contextualization sound much nicer. -- dieter ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dieter Fensel, http://www.deri.org/ Tel.: +43-512-5076485/8
Received on Tuesday, 23 August 2005 15:36:00 UTC