- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 09:53:46 +0100
- To: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@openhealth.org>, <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Jonathan: > I think this issue deserves at the very least a written explanation for the > archives. The minutes of the F2F do not have such an explanation. The qualified restrictions of DAML+OIL: - have added to the difficulty of learning the language - have not been used in practice - are barely understood by the community - potentially add to the difficulty of implementing the language - have no compelling use cases therefore: > > > > Proposed Resolution > > =================== > > > > I propose that the WG > > - decides that the qualified restrictions of DAML+OIL are not part of OWL. > > - approves the test cases of > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0126.html > > as reflecting this decision. > > - closes the unmentioned-qualified-restrictions issue. > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 24 April 2002 05:10:04 UTC