- From: Natasha Noy <noy@SMI.Stanford.EDU>
- Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2004 14:21:39 -0700
- To: "Uschold, Michael F" <michael.f.uschold@boeing.com>
- Cc: "Aldo Gangemi" <a.gangemi@istc.cnr.it>, <welty@us.ibm.com>, "Nicola Guarino" <guarino@loa-cnr.it>, <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>, <rector@cs.man.ac.uk>
On Apr 23, 2004, at 6:20 PM, Uschold, Michael F wrote: > I agree with the spirit of this, with the following proviso. Some > may find if of passing interest what ontological purists think, but > most I expect won't care unless there is some specific advantage. We > might just stick to the impacts of different decisions and not mention > the notion of ontological purity at all, or perhaps just footnote that > one approach or another is the one preferred by 'ontological purists' > for those that might be interested. In theory, I agree with you. In practice, let's just take it on a case by case basis and see what we want to say when we encounter this discrepancy (which we probably will, but I don't think we have just yet). In practice, we may often find out that the purist's solution makes a lot of sense. But again, this discussion would be more grounded if we had a specific problem. Natasha
Received on Saturday, 24 April 2004 17:21:52 UTC