W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > May 2002

Re: LANG: compliance levels

From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2002 09:05:56 -0400
Message-ID: <002c01c1f1da$1a49e720$0301a8c0@ne.client2.attbi.com>
To: "Deborah McGuinness" <dlm@KSL.Stanford.EDU>
Cc: "Enrico Motta" <e.motta@open.ac.uk>, <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Deborah McGuinness wrote:
> Correct - local restrictions can be used to express global restrictions as
> state.
> that is not the issue under discussion - it is universally qualified local
> restrictions vs. existentially qualified local restrictions.

Ok. I recall seeing something suggesting that Level 1 have only global
restrictions, and I would say the opposite (regardless of what RDFS does).

Ian's argument makes sense: if we have only existential or universal, then
existential seems to be the way to go -- on the other hand I fear that I am
still sorting out existential, universal and the "Q"s, so perhaps it is
premature to decide this seemingly straightforward issue.

Received on Wednesday, 1 May 2002 20:52:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:04:30 UTC