SEMANTICS - we need them NOW

Dear All,

As you may have noticed from the discussion about testing, we are
already in trouble within the WG because we have so far failed to
resolve the central question of the semantics of the language. In
particular, it really makes little sense to continue with work on
developing a test suite until we know the meaning of the language we
are supposed to be testing.

Without a clear semantics, OWL is COMPLETELY USELESS. We have already
experienced disagreements amongst members of the WG regarding their
understanding of the meaning of OWL statements. If we can't agree,
what chance is there for people outside the WG, much less for "agents"
out on the web. Without agreement on the meaning of OWL statements, it
is hard to see what utility the language can possibly have, or how we
can expect people to start using it and building tools to support it.

Now that we have done our duty regarding the generation of working
documents, I believe that we should give TOP PRIORITY to resolving the
outstanding issues regarding the semantics of the language.

Regards, Ian

Received on Monday, 5 August 2002 11:35:17 UTC