- From: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@swi.psy.uva.nl>
- Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 23:51:53 +0100
- To: WebOnt WG <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
- CC: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Colleagues, Now that we are nearing the end of getting the use case and requirements working draft done, it is time to get moving on our next set of activities to bring our language to fruition. PLEASE NOTE: there is an action item for all members at the end of this message (see *****) WOWG GOAL: As stated in our charter, the goal of this working group is to essentially finish the work on DAML+OIL -- cleaning up issues that need repair, removing features that seem overly complex, adding critical features needed for our requirements, and (especially) documenting everything and creating examples. In addition, we are expected to show, via demonstration, that the language can be implemented and tools built to use it. NEXT STEPS: We need to begin several processes in parallel if we are going to complete our work in time to get this language through the W3C process before the window of opportunity closes - 1. Language Features (functionality): We need to produce a document similar to the DAML+OIL Reference that describes the specifics of our language - starting place on this is determining the language features we need based on the requirements document and a "not-covered/not-used" analysis of D+O. 2. Implementation and Test Suite - we need examples that both show off the language and that can be used to test implementations (See 4. below) 3. Semantics: As evidenced by the layering discussion, developing the semantic model for the language (mandated by our charter) is not easy, but needs to be done. We expect to produce both a model theory and an axiomization similar to the ones prepared for DAML+OIL. 4. Developing a set of methodological guidelines on how to use OWL in practice. This should show use of the language in handling common modelling issues. It can take the form of a walkthru, but it may be difficult to find one example domain that shows off everything. . The examples need to be realistic (and probably linked to the test cases, see 2). The guidelines should cover modelling issues for which no direct language feature is available, e.g. defaults, part-of relations. These four must all "co-evolve" that is, we must work on them in parallel, but coordinate and make sure we stay consistent with each group checking the work of the others. WHAT WE NEED YOU TO DO: We are asking every member of the WG to pick one of the above as your "primary" responsibility -- that is, the one that we will be expecting you to track and participate in. You are, of course, welcome to participate in the others, and all conversation will be on the mailing list, so you will be able to follow all the activity. However, we need to make sure we have people to cover all of these, so we'd like to get an indication of your interest area soon as we can. ***** TO DO: Please let us know your primary interest area by Monday, March 4. We will discuss these on the teklecon of March 7. Please note - we expect report out from each group at the A'dam meeting in April. Thanks in advance for your expeditious responses, Guus Schreiber and Jim Hendler -- A. Th. Schreiber, SWI, University of Amsterdam, Roetersstraat 15 NL-1018 WB Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Tel: +31 20 525 6793 Fax: +31 20 525 6896; E-mail: schreiber@swi.psy.uva.nl WWW: http://www.swi.psy.uva.nl/usr/Schreiber/home.html
Received on Monday, 25 February 2002 17:49:17 UTC