Re: Proposed response to Ken Laskey

Jim Hendler's proposed response to Ken Laskey included the following:
>>  While OWL in its present form does not intrinsically support such
>>  probablistic or conditional associations useful in real semantic queries,
>>  application-specific semantics could be encoded in OWL to support such
>>  functionality.
>>  </comment>
>Actually, the use case was talking about defeasible inheritance
>reasoning, not probability. Although probability can be clearly of use
>in some use cases, the working group did not consider it an important
>requirement, although support for probabilistic information is implied
>by Requirement R12. Attaching Information to Statements. However, 
>you are right that the "typically" is misleading here, and therefore 
>we will change this to read
>"...a `Late Georgian chest of drawers', in the absence of other 
>information, would be assumed to be `made of mahogany.'  This 
>knowledge ... "
>which we agree will be less misleading.

It may be too late to add, but I thought that Jeff had agreed to 
specifically add mention of defeasible inheritance reasoning in the 
"Default property value" objective in the Requirements document.  Is there
a problem with making this change?


Received on Friday, 18 July 2003 13:31:01 UTC