Re: ADMIN: Agenda/Logistics Jan 30 (updated)

> The current proposal, by Jeremy [1], is to include all of
> rdfs:label
> rdfs:comment
> rdfs:seeAlso
> rdfs:isDefinedBy

> [1]

That msg was intended to point out a minimal set of required things that did 
not appear to be included.
Other annotations that are widely used in DAML+OIL include those from Dublin 
Core. (Mentioned in our requirements doc).
Also, it seems unmotivated to restrict the RDFS position of allowing 
user-defined annotations.

Moreover, the msg cited does not propose any semantic solution.

My msg from this morning:

is a proposed solution.
This solution is illustrated in the (ongoing) work on syntax:


Received on Thursday, 30 January 2003 03:37:14 UTC