Re: OVERVIEW: WG preference - action from telecon

"Peter F. Patel-Schneider" wrote:

> From: Deborah McGuinness <dlm@ksl.Stanford.EDU>
> Subject: Re: OVERVIEW: WG preference - action from telecon
> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2003 09:31:11 -0800
>
> >
> > excellent.
> > i think to publish we need a resolution on
> > 1 - jim's request to take datatypes out and peter's request not to take them
> > out
>
> Jim's request, as I understand it, was not to take datatypes out, but
> instead was to fix the discussion.  You could look at AS&S to see how
> datatypes are treated.

Jim's email yesterday said "We have decided to do a new release of most of our
documents for various reasons.  We'd like to include Overview if it
  can be done in time.  To be in same batch would require Dan gets it by Monday -
we agreed as group documents
  probably wouldn't reflect the "sameClassAs" change, but would meet other major
comments raised in reviews (your only
  outstanding one is the datatype section issue I raised - for this version you
could delete while we decide what to say for
  the LC version,"

If you want to suggest a very short section for inclusion that is fine.

> > 2 - the current addition of intersection of named classes only which is what
> > I understood was decided on the phone call and ian's and peter's
> > understanding of named classes and restrictions and owl lite.
>
> A quick perusal of the minutes of the phone call turned up nothing
> indicating that intersection was only for named classes.  Instead the
> minutes say that interesection is to be as indicated in AS&S.

The email I was working from from jim said:

"The consensus was that since it is easy to create certain kinds of
intersections in Owl Lite, should include owl:intersectionOf in the
Owl Lite vocabulary list in the Overview document.    The discussion
of this feature can look liek the discussion of the other features
that have restrictions in lite - i.e. the paragraph just says
smething like "can only be used with named classes" (oe however that
is made clear in the Overview)."

Since we have had discussions about trying to make it easy for frame systems,  I
expected that that was taken into account with the use of named classes.

This is not a hard thing to fix in the overview if it the decision to have both -
I just dont want to do another update if I did the first one right yesterday in my
round of changes that attempted to address the email I received.


>
> > 3 - franks updates today.
> >
> > frank has write lock
> >
> > d
>
> peter

--
 Deborah L. McGuinness
 Knowledge Systems Laboratory
 Gates Computer Science Building, 2A Room 241
 Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-9020
 email: dlm@ksl.stanford.edu
 URL: http://ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/index.html
 (voice) 650 723 9770    (stanford fax) 650 725 5850   (computer fax)  801 705
0941

Received on Tuesday, 4 February 2003 13:23:54 UTC