Network Solutions claims that www.daml.org should again be resolvable by tomorrow morning.
Thanks to Ian, Frank, and others for their work over the holidays.
Frank brought up several outstanding issues:
Using cons pairs is incredibly verbose. Dan Connolly's daml:collection parse type pushes the envelope on the RDF standard, and hasn't yet been implemented in any tools.
ACTION (Dan Connolly) and ACTION (Stefan Decker): develop formal proposals for discussion next week.
Frank had noted in email that only cardinality was exposed in DAML+OIL ontology definitions. Dan and Stefan suggested an approach using attributes.
Mike noted that this only covers ontologies. Exposed content in instances is still an issue, e.g. XML Namespace restrictions on repeating attributes.
RESOLVED: Both syntaxes will be allowed. ACTION (Frank van Harmelen): add footnote to specification.
ACTION (Peter Patel-Schneider): augment semantics to include domain/range.
ACTION (Stefan Decker): Check daml+oil.daml and daml+oil-ex.daml using RDF API.
ACTION (Deb McGuinness, with Richard Fikes): update axiomatic semantics.
ACTION (Ian Horrocks): add inverse relation for samePropertyAs
ACTION (Frank van Harmelen): add note to reference that concrete types are expected to be included in an upcoming release
ACTION (everyone): review the DAML+OIL documents and forward comments to the coordinators:
Pat Hayes felt that most of the SUO folks would not currently accept DAML+OIL. He also noted that Mike Genesereth had reported that several groups are working on an XML-based syntax for KIF.
Jim Hendler (speaking personally) feels it's too early for outreach efforts such as this and FIPA. We may want to defer to the expected W3C Working Group and/or keep this on the back burner.
$Id: 2001-01-02.html,v 1.7 2001/01/15 19:03:26 mdean Exp $