Re: DAML+OIL Expressivity Question

From: Deborah McGuinness (
Date: 11/09/01

fine - then from a wg perspective, it is a slippery slope to start putting "foo"s
in the core.


Jim Hendler wrote:

> At 4:39 PM -0800 11/8/01, Deborah McGuinness wrote:
> >that is doable.
> >there will be a number of daml:foo s  and they will have a lot of arguments
> >and a lot of implications  thus the english description of them will not be
> >compact but doable.
> >
> >I guess then i should add a request to what i said people might send me - a
> >proposed daml syntax for the new request as well.
> >i am not expecting any one person to send everything  but eventually we want
> >to fill in the template.
> >
> >And on the notion of DAML+OIL layers,  I would claim that we will put the
> >daml:foos in a non-core layer.
> >While we at stanford will want to update our daml parsers to understand the
> >fancy foo's we dont want to break all of the existing tools every time we
> >add a new foo.
> >while the daml+oil core may find a fair amount of stability, i expect the
> >foos to keep growing.
> >
> >d
> from a joint committee perspective that's fine.  From a WG
> perspective, we are trying to finalize a proposal - I don't think we
> will propose layers, unless there is a compelling reason to do so.
> What we are trying to propose is the core.
> --
> Professor James Hendler                 
> Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies     301-405-2696
> Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.    301-405-6707 (Fax)
> AV Williams Building, Univ of Maryland            College Park, MD 20742

 Deborah L. McGuinness
 Knowledge Systems Laboratory
 Gates Computer Science Building, 2A Room 241
 Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-9020
 (voice) 650 723 9770    (stanford fax) 650 725 5850   (computer fax)  801 705

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