- From: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 11:20:12 -0400
- To: ewallace@cme.nist.gov
- CC: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Done in the editor's draft: http://www.cse.lehigh.edu/~heflin/webont/reqdoc/index.html Jeff ewallace@cme.nist.gov wrote: > > 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? > > -Evan
Received on Tuesday, 22 July 2003 11:20:24 UTC