- 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