Re: proposal for working on the ontology language

>  So we are forbidden to even consider the first, but encouraged to 
>tackle the second. Great. I guess this is what we have managers for, 
>right?
>
>Jim, are you serious? If you think that inventing a language with a 
>clear semantics that can describe its own metatheory is 'doable' by 
>the webont committee (or indeed by anyone on the planet in the next, 
>say, five years), I will enjoy sitting back and watching y'all try 
>to do it. It will be like shooting fish in a barrel.


All - for the record - in scope does not mean we must, should, are 
encouraged etc.  It means we are not forbidden.  Things that may be 
in scope, but are technically unachievable would obviously not be 
things we are likely to achieve consensus on.  We need to leave 
something for the future WGs to do...
  -JH


-- 
Professor James Hendler				  hendler@cs.umd.edu
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
AV Williams Building, Univ of Maryland		  College Park, MD 20742
http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler

Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2001 23:56:29 UTC