Re: problems with DAML+OIL

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider (
Date: 01/16/01

I agree with Jim that a good way to go is to have a language construct that
asserts equality/inequality.  


From: Jim Hendler <>
Subject: Re: problems with DAML+OIL
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 15:10:26 -0500

> At 9:55 -0500 1/12/01, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> >[I expect that I will also send this out to rdf-logic (possibly modified),
> >but I wanted to send it to the committee now, and I can't send it to
> >rdf-logic until DAML+OIL is released.  peter]
> Folks- language is announced - go for it!
> >
> >OK, now that there is a DAML+OIL release, it is time to try to put a
> >spanner in the works.  (Not that it is time to sabotage the release, it is
> >just that it is now time to see what problems remain, so that the next
> >release can fix them.)  I expect that this list is not complete!
> >
> >
> >Problem 1:  The lack of a theory of identity (or equality, or equivalence)
> >
> I agree with Peter that this is important, and that we need it. 
> However, I wonder if the correct solution isn't a langauge feature to 
> allow it to be said -- we have the ability to say things are the same 
> class or same property -- why not a similar explicit construct for 
> same entity?  I wanted to ask this here, rather than on rdf-logic, 
> because it is likely I am missing something, and figured I'd rather 
> get beaten up in private, rather than in public
>   thanks
>   JH
> Prof. James Hendler		Program Manager
> DARPA/ISO			703-696-2238 (phone)
> 3701 N. Fairfax Dr.		703-696-2201 (Fax)
> Arlington, VA 22203

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST