- From: Mike Dean <mdean@bbn.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 13:20:26 -0500
- To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
This note summarize some possible requirements, mostly already addressed by RDF(S) and/or DAML+OIL, that I think were taken for granted in listing our requirements [1]. It also includes a list of current DAML+OIL features that were not addressed by the requirements. The distinction between the 2 lists is somewhat arbitrary and not critical. Deb McGuinness contributed to these lists. Possibly implicit requirements: 1) URI naming of instances (ability to refer to instances defined by someone else). This could be merged with "Unambiguous term referencing with URIs", which seems to focus on classes and properties. 2) adding properties to "someone else's" instances. 3) adding properties to "someone else's" classes (ability to extend a class without subclassing it, ability to split Restrictions across multiple pages/ontologies). This goes with 2, but may conflict with the desire for a greater frame orientation. 4) enumerated classes (daml:oneOf) 5) closed sets (daml:List, daml:collection). This could be included as part of "Ability to state closed worlds". 6) the ability to order property values (e.g. for a list of authors, or a sequence of events) In addition, the following DAML+OIL features don't seem to be referenced in the requirements: 1) local restrictions (the ability to use the same property in somewhat different ways for different classes) 2) qualified restrictions (cardinalityQ, etc.) 3) daml:disjointFrom 4) daml:UnambiguousProperty Mike [1] http://km.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/owl/ (draft of 7 Feb 2002)
Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2002 13:22:31 UTC