- From: Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>
- Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 22:20:59 +0100
- To: Webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
[I sent this to the mailing list earlier, but it never made it.
Sorry if you get this twice].
Raphael Volz wrote:
> The Harmelen/Horrocks doc
> (http://www.cs.vu.nl/~frankh/spool/OWL-first-sketch.html) states that
> * collect idiom for inclusion in the language
> This should be based on
> o experience with DAML+OIL
> o our use-cases
> o experience with earlier ontology/KR-languages
>
> is a next step. We elaborated this issue in our submission to
> the Semantic Web workshop to WWW11:
> http://www.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/WBS/rvo/modular.pdf
Raphael,
I'm somewhat confused by this. I looked at your paper. It's interesting stuff,
but if I understand it correctly, it's main concern is with modularity, and
corresponding issues like naming, referring, importing, etc. As such, I don't
see how this contributes to frame-based idiom for OWL.
Your paper seems more relevant to the other "next step to take" from our first
sketch:
> deal with other requirements/objectives
> The above focusses mostly on the ontological expressiveness of the
language,
> and not really at requirements like tagging, importing ontologies, etc.
Can you correct me if I'm wrong?
Frank.
----
Received on Monday, 11 March 2002 16:21:50 UTC