Re: Coordination with RDF Core

From: Frank van Harmelen (
Date: 07/05/01

> p.s. Frank - I'm having trouble reaching your server - can you email
> me a copy of the document?

Sorry, I had meant to attach the document to the previous email, but forgot.
Here it is.

Mike, can you put this on next week's agenda, so we can OK it (hopefully), and pass it on as Jim suggests?

Coordination points between RDF(S) and DAML+OIL

Coordination points between RDF(S) and DAML+OIL.

By Peter Patel-Schneider
edited by Frank van Harmelen
after discussion in the Joint Committee
during the meeting of 26 June 2001.

This document describes which areas of RDF and RDF Schema need attention based on our experiences with defining DAML+OIL as an extension of RDF Schema. It is input from the DAML+OIL Joint Committee to the RDF Core working group.
We discuss:

What does DAML+OIL depend on from RDF(S)

What does DAML+OIL not use at all

We have chosen to not assign semantics to the following elements of RDF and RDF Schema:

What changes does DAML+OIL require

As indicated in the
DAML+OIL reference document and as summarised in a message to the www-rdf-logic mailing list, DAML+OIL takes exception to the intended/inferred semantics of RDF Schema in three places:

What areas are problematic

    - RDFS - frames / global ranges, but no local restrictions
    - RDF gives meaning to all syntax
      (FvH: = any set of triples?)
      - makes it hard to define extensions
    - what is a URI? - syntax and semantics

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