Re: MINUES: Teleconference 30 Jan 2003

At 8:39 -0500 1/31/03, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>From: "Smith, Michael K" <michael.smith@eds.com>
>Subject: MINUES: Teleconference 30 Jan 2003
>Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 13:31:56 -0600
>
>[...]
>
>>  ACTION: Peter Patel-Schneider to study annotations bug and come up
>>  with proposal.
>
>[...]
>
>Here is the situation with annotations:
>
>Summary:
>
>Annotations are only a part of the abstract syntax.  There they have
>no semantic impact.  So that OWL Lite and OWL DL can have
>annotation-like constructs in the triple syntax, annotations are
>translated into triples, which do have semantic impact.
>
>In the presence of annotations, entailments do not line up between the
>direct semantics and the RDF-style semantics.  However, there is no
>non-monotonicity, contrary to my thinking in yesterday's telecon.
>
>
>Solutions:
>
>1/ Do nothing.
>
>2/ Change the semantics document a whole lot.  This may take a while.
>
>    Several components to handle annotations would have to be added to
>    the direct semantics interpretations, and incorporated into the
>    semantic rules.  The correspondence proof would have to be
>    overhauled as well.  I think that this can be done, but it is
>    significant work.
>
>3/ Remove annotations from the triple syntax for OWL DL and OWL Lite.
>    This would be easy.

Peter, could you explain a little more about the implications of the 
third of these?  That is, do you mean "not allow annotations" (I hope 
not) or do you mean that somehow annotations would not have a 
semantic impact?
  thanks
  JH
-- 
Professor James Hendler				  hendler@cs.umd.edu
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  240-731-3822 (Cell)
http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler

Received on Friday, 31 January 2003 09:45:47 UTC