- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 09:52:23 +0100
- To: Varga Péter <pvarga@mit.bme.hu>
- Cc: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
Varga Péter wrote: > > Jeremy Caroll wrote: > >>>Also excluded were unions and intersections of properties. >>> (...) >>>Note procedurally what happened was not that these things were considered >>>and rejected but that our charter said start with DAML+OIL, D+O did not >>>have these things and noone suggested adding them. > (...) > > This is the rationale I see behind excluding role expressions from OWL. And > this is why I think that -- allowing that it might have happened from mere > continguence (which, personally speaking, I do not believe:) -- it is a good > decisions (although I also suffer from it in my modeling practice:) > > All the bests, > Peter I agree that the rationales that Peter points to report the underlying causes. Daml+Oil, I believe, had been designed with such concerns in mind; also, for those additions that we did consider for OWL, such work was discussed. Jeremy
Received on Friday, 30 April 2004 04:54:14 UTC