Re: OVERVIEW: WG preference - action from telecon

About intersection in Lite, the Reference now includes in Sect. 8.3 the 
following text fragment for types of "class axioms" allowed in Lite:

> 3. Class axioms that consist of a class description of the owl:
 > intersectionOf type, with a class identifier as the domain
> value of the intersection statement. The range should be a 
 > list of class identifiers and/or property restrictions.

I think this is what we decoded and it is consistent with the OWL Lite 
class axioms in AS&S (Sec. 2.3.1.1, the "complete" class with multiple 
"supers", which leads to a syntactic form that is covered by the second 
mapping rule for classes in Sec. 4.1)

Guus

	
Deborah McGuinness wrote:
> 
> 
> "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
> 
> 
> 

-- 
A. Th. Schreiber, SWI, University of Amsterdam,
http://www.swi.psy.uva.nl/usr/Schreiber/home.html

Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2003 04:07:00 UTC