- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 15:50:22 +0100
- To: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>, Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, www-webont-wg@w3.org
Thanks Ian for this pointer - it does seem highly relevant to the content of my proposal. > 4. If you really did succeed in eliminating the ability to express > "complete" classes in OWL Lite, you would make it useless in a wide > range of important applications (e.g., see [3]). > [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0088.html > I repeat one part of that: [[ We have also done a lot of work recently on a publish and subscribe system using DAML+OIL/OWL. This is similar to the above service discovery application in that subscribers describe the kinds of "publication" (e.g., messages) they are interested in, and messages are routed to subscribers according to their descriptions. ]] If I have understood correctly, without the complete class descriptions the subscriptions could not be made. For instances if I want messages both about HP and the SemanticWeb, I can say that the messages I want are subClassOf both of these, but without the complete part of the class description any particular message that has been categorized as in both, may fail to be in my subset of the intersection. Personally, I think we could decide that publish and subscribe type applications need to use OWL DL; but I emphasis - I want to concur with the majority here. Jeremy
Received on Monday, 27 January 2003 09:51:15 UTC