- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 18:40:49 -0400
- To: webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
A number of issues on our issue list [1] were raised during the
production of our requirements document and may not directly relate
to current status of our WG discussions. I am trying to get these
rewritten in the form of our other issues so that we can respond to
them, In doing so, I think some of these issues either change status
or need new writeups. As soon as I can, I will send a separate email
on each of the issues for which I propose so email discussion can
proceed correctly, However, below is a summary of my proposals so you
know what is coming and can provide immediate feedback if you think
I've misunderstood something. If you think I've misunderstood an
issue, please let me know soon before I write it up.
-JH
p.s. Where it says "Close this issue" I'm proposing to own the issue
and go through discussion at telecon - so none is closed by fiat -
but I want to make sure I'm not rushing to close something that
someone feels strongly about.
Issue 2.1 URI naming of instances
Proposal - CLOSE THIS ISSUE
I think this issue was raised in the context of the requirements
document and is not needed anymore. Since we will have RDF
documents, instances can have URIs.
Issue 2.2 - Adding properties to someone else's instances
Proposal - CLOSE THIS ISSUE
I think this issue was raised in the context of the requirements
document and is not needed anymore. Since we will have RDF
documents, we cannot prevent people from being able to point at and
claim things about other people's instances.
Issue 2.3 - Adding Properties to "someone else's" classes
Leave as is
Issue 2.4 - Enumerated Classes (daml:oneOf)
Proposal - CLOSE THIS ISSUE
The issue here was that the requirements document didn't directly
motivate this language feature. However, no one has advocated its
removal and it does seem to be used in examples within WG discussions.
Issue 2.5 - Closed Sets (daml:List, daml:Collection)
Proposal - change status to OPEN
This is an action in which members of our group are working w/RDF
Core to reach a resolution, since it is open, we should call it so.
Issue 2.6 - Ordered Property Values
Leave as is (will eventually need better writeup)
Issue 3.1 - Local Restrictions
Proposal - CLOSE THIS ISSUE
The issue here was that the requirements document didn't motivate
this language feature. However, no one has advocated its removal and
there does seem to be consensus it is a desirable feature.
Issue 3.2 - Qualified Restrictions
Already closed, no change.
Issue 3.3 - daml:disjointFrom
Frankly, I have no clue - there is no daml:disjointFrom in the
DAML+OIL ref. Can we remove this or someone explain the issue?
Issue 3.4 - daml:UnambiguousProperty
Proposal - CLOSE THIS ISSUE
The issue here was that the requirements document didn't motivate
this language feature. However, no one has advocated its removal and
there does seem to be consensus it is a desirable feature.
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html
--
Professor James Hendler hendler@cs.umd.edu
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies 301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab. 301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 240-731-3822 (Cell)
http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler
Received on Wednesday, 29 May 2002 18:41:28 UTC