- From: <ewallace@cme.nist.gov>
- Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 10:47:03 -0400 (EDT)
- To: noy@SMI.Stanford.EDU, welty@us.ibm.com
- Cc: public-swbp-wg@w3.org, public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org, schreiber@cs.vu.nl, swick@w3.org
Chris Welty wrote: >I don't really have time to get into this discussion, but FYI I am working >on a document describing how to represent fluents, so I think it's even >more important to keep time out of this note. This issue has come up in other fora with respect to the n-ary note. However, I agree with Chris' approach to it. We should address the problem of modeling properties which vary over time with a fluent note. Once we have the fluent note, we could put a footnote referencing it by the first measurement example (temperature?) in the n-ary note. We don't want to put such a discussion in the main body of the n-ary note, and I think it would not be time well spent searching for non-measurement examples for the n-ary note. These notes are about patterns and approaches to ontology design, not about defining fragments of some comprehensive single ontology for everything. -Evan
Received on Friday, 12 August 2005 14:47:27 UTC