Re: What OWL doesn't do (LC response editing)

On Wed, 2003-05-28 at 07:11, Jim Hendler wrote:
[...]

>  In short, Ken would really 
> like to see a section somewhere (I think maybe overview or guide) 
> that explains a little better what OWL does, and more importantly 
> doesn't, do.
>    Anyone feel like taking a stab at this?

Hmm... the objectives section of the requirements document
already says this, to my satisfaction.

>    JH
> p.s. Might also be a good place to set the expectation that extending 
> the OWL vocabulary, even in fairly small ways, is likely to take one 
> out of DL -- that was another thing that came as a surprise to many 
> people I talked to.
> 
> 
> [1] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/2003May/0071.html
> 
> 
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/

Received on Wednesday, 28 May 2003 14:13:19 UTC