- From: Huhns, Michael <huhns@engr.sc.edu>
- Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 10:53:11 -0500
- To: "Monika Solanki" <monika@dmu.ac.uk>
- Cc: <public-sws-ig@w3.org>
Hi Monika, If a Precondition is a special kind of Condition, then it must have some property (or a restriction on some property) that makes it special. What is this? That is, given a logical formula that evaluates to true or false, what property does it have that would enable you to determine whether it is a Condition or Precondition? Cheers, Mike Huhns -----Original Message----- From: public-sws-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:public-sws-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Monika Solanki Sent: Saturday, November 08, 2003 5:15 AM To: David Martin Cc: public-sws-ig@w3.org Subject: Re: the precondition property in OWL-S 1.0 David Martin wrote: > > [Note: this thread is moving to public-sws-ig. After this message, > replies should only be sent to public-sws-ig.] > > Marta Sabou wrote: > >> >> >> Monika, Drew, >> >> I completely agree with the proposed solution. This should >> definitely be >> implemented in the next release. > > > I also agree, except note that there are 2 proposals "on the table": > > I think Monika suggested this: > > Process - hasPrecondition - Precondition > where Precondition is a subclass of Condition > > whereas Drew seems to be suggesting this: > > Process - hasPrecondition - Condition > > (with no Precondition class anywhere). I think we should retain the Precondition class and the hasPrecondition property. This is because, although Precondition is effectively a Condition, however it is a "special" kind of Condition. In the process model, Condition is a general thing, which is also used for Conditional Effects and Conditional Outputs. > > That reminds me - we still have an open issue about the class of an > effect (that is, the range of ceEffect). Currently it's just "Thing", > which isn't very satisfying. Do people feel that it's OK to have > Condition for this range, or do we need something distinct? > > - David > >> >> Cheers, >> >> Marta >> >> >> Drew McDermott wrote: >> >>> [Monika Solanki, in re DAML-S spec] >>> Currently in the 1.0 version of the process model, we have the >>> following >>> >>> <owl:Class rdf:ID="Precondition" /> >>> - <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:ID="preCondition"> >>> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#Precondition" /> >>> <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#Condition" /> >>> </owl:ObjectProperty> >>> >>> Where, Condition is defined as, >>> >>> - <owl:Class rdf:ID="Condition"> >>> <rdfs:comment>This is a "place-holder" for now, which awaits >>> further >>> work from the DAML/OWL community. An instance of Condition is a >>> logical >>> formula that evaluates to true or false. Eventually we expect this >>> to be >>> defined elsewhere, as part of a OWL extension allowing for logical >>> expressions.</rdfs:comment> >>> </owl:Class> >>> >>> Somehow I am not able to grasp the utility of the property >>> "preCondition". Since in this model, we have IOPEs as Classes, >>> therefore I believe all we need to do is make Precondition a >>> subclass of >>> Condition. >>> >>> <owl:Class rdf:ID="PreCondition"> >>> <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#Condition" /> >>> </owl:Class> >>> >>> The property preCondition, introduces redundancy as it is ranging >>> over >>> the class "Condition" anyways. >>> >>> Feedback appreciated in case I missed something. >>> >>> You're right, as far as I can see. The important property is >>> hasPrecondition, which connects a Condition to a Process or Process >>> step. There is no reason for the class Precondition to exist, let >>> alone a property preCondition linking a Precondition to a Condition >>> (itself?). >>> >>> -- >>> -- Drew McDermott >>> Yale University CS >>> Dept. >> >> >> > -- **>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<** Monika Solanki Software Technology Research Laboratory(STRL) De Montfort University Hawthorn building, H00.18 The Gateway Leicester LE1 9BH, UK phone: +44 (0)116 250 6170 intern: 6170 email: monika@dmu.ac.uk web: http://www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~monika **>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**>><<**
Received on Saturday, 8 November 2003 10:54:24 UTC