- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 11:12:45 -0500
- To: tarod@softhome.net
- Cc: conen@gmx.de, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
From: tarod@softhome.net Subject: Re: [Paper:] Logical Interpretations of RDFS - A Compatibility Guide Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 15:21:28 GMT > > I just read the paper of Wolfram Conen and Reinhold Klapsing and I > totally agree with them. About the mail sent by Peter F. Patel-Schneider... > again and again you are explaining rdfschema in function of DAML+OIL, why > the hell don't we forget DAML to explain RDFSchema. RDF and RDFSchema > doesn't need DAML to be explained and the new approach for the range/domain > semantic does not make any sense excluding DAML. I strongly protest this incorrect description of the message that I sent out. The only mention to DAML+OIL in that message was that there was an axiomatization of RDF(S) as part of an axiomatization of DAML+OIL. The axiomatization of RDF(S) in that paper is completely independent of DAML+OIL. > Regards, > Marc Peter F. Patel-Schneider Bell Lab Research
Received on Monday, 19 November 2001 11:14:26 UTC