- From: Christopher Welty <welty@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 11:16:29 -0500
- To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
I'm still here in Manchester and have talked to Peter about the "full-ness" of the two proposed deprecation classes, deprecatedClass and deprecatedProperty. To avoid having this put an ontology in OWL Full, Peter considered adding them as special tags to the syntax, and also bundling these in as annotations. I considered my own needs for versioning and also spoke extensively with Alan Rector who absolutely requires versioning for his medical ontologies (it's required by law, as I understood it, so this is a stronger "requires" than we've considered). Alan needs far more than what we have proposed, but also needs to be in Lite or DL. He is willing to define his own OWL Full ontology for his versioning needs and then separate the versioning axioms into another ontology that will not be reasoned over. This is, honestly, the first time I've carefully considered the versioning issue, and I find that augmenting the syntax or bundling versioning into annotations may require people like Alan to completely bypass the OWL versioning stuff and build something else. However, keeping deprecatedClass and deprecatedProperty as the "seeds" of a versioning ontology would allow him to simply augment this part of the standard. I consider this to be a better solution. The net of it is that we stick with Jeff's proposed solution, including the (possibly unexpected) consequence that any ontology that uses deprecatedClass and deprecatedProperty are in OWL Full. In Guide, I will simply note that while this is the case (using deprecation puts you in Full), users who wish to remain in Lite or DL can separate their versioning information into another ontology that imports the one being versioned. Peter doesn't care, and is happy that it requires no change to AS&S. Alan is still considering it, and seems to be in favor of it. I am in favor as well. I realize this has already been resolved to be the solution, but again I'm not sure those in favor of it realized deprecation causes fullness. Any comments? Finally, as I've pointed out previously, several of these extra-logical features that are not in the AS&S need (don't they???) normative references. Where should they go? -Chris Dr. Christopher A. Welty, Knowledge Structures Group IBM Watson Research Center, 19 Skyline Dr. Hawthorne, NY 10532 USA Voice: +1 914.784.7055, IBM T/L: 863.7055 Fax: +1 914.784.6078, Email: welty@us.ibm.com
Received on Monday, 13 January 2003 11:17:14 UTC