ACTION: lite/fast/large inclusion

> ACTION: Guus, Frank: to move the issue forward, will write up 1-d
> and 2-d views to make clearer to users.

Frank and I discussed this. We concluded the following:

- it is really a 2-d space: expressivity (Lite vs Full) and semantics 
(Fast and Large)
- for presentation purposes a 1-d presentation is highly preferable
- in the proposal for 1-d:  LiteFast -> FullFast -> FullLarge we have no 
explicit name for LiteLarge. This might be a problem for RDF users/tool 
developers upgrading to OWL, as LiteLarge would be their natural place 
to start.
- however: we need to release a new version of the WDs soon which MUST 
include a description of this issue

Therefore a procedural proposal could be:
- for the moment: use the 1-d descruption LiteFast -> FullFast -> 
FullLarge in the WDs
- revisit this issue based on feedback on this from the public


A. Th. Schreiber, SWI, University of Amsterdam

Received on Thursday, 31 October 2002 10:05:44 UTC