- From: Sheila McIlraith <sam@KSL.Stanford.EDU>
- Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 14:06:43 -0800 (PST)
- To: abcharl@maltanet.net, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
Charlie, As per our offline exchange, parsing DAML-S should follow directly from parsing DAML. It's just the same as parsing any DAML ontology, except that you know in advance that there are some distinguished classes that will exist in all representations. I haven't looked at how the DAML parser works to comment directly on the approach you're proposing, but it sounds reasonable. I'm curious. What are you guys going to be using DAML-S for? I'm always interested in seeing how it's being used! Regards, Sheila Charlie wrote: > First of all thanks for your comments. > > So effectively if one needs to parse a DAML-S file (having triples as > output) then a DAML parser such as that incorporated within the DAML API or > Jena would suffice. Right? > Because of the fact that DAML adds expressive power to RDF then these APIs > try to get at this add on by having specific classes added to deal with > DAML. Hence I suppose a similar technique is to be used to get to the > information that the extra classes and properties expressed in DAML-S > provide. Right? > > Charlie ============================================================================== Sheila McIlraith, PhD Phone: 650-723-7932 Knowledge Systems Laboratory Fax: 650-725-5850 Department of Computer Science Gates Sciences Building, 2A-248 http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/sam Stanford University E-mail sam@ksl.stanford.edu Stanford, CA 94305-9020
Received on Friday, 9 November 2001 17:06:48 UTC