Re: layering DAML+OIL on top of RDF model theory

From: Pat Hayes (
Date: 11/29/01

>Here is a technical challenge.
>Is it possible to layer a model theory for DAML+OIL on top of a model
>theory for RDF?

Er...yes?. The answer seems obvious, which makes me suspect that 
there is a trap lurking here.

>  What would this mean?

That the MT for DAML+OIL would assign the same meaning to the RDF(S) 
subset of DAML+OIL as the RDF MT assigns to it, at a minimum.

>  How would it work?

Rather like the current MT for DAML, but re-stated using explicit 
extension mappings for classes and properties.

>Note that the current model theory for DAML+OIL is *not* layered on top of
>a model theory for RDF.

I don't think it would be more than a simple exercise in 
transcription. I have always assumed that we could do this when 
required. (Hopefully it could be phrased so that DAML+OIL could be 
seen as a 'semantic extension' to the RDF MT, by imposing semantic 
conditions on the  daml: reserved vocabulary, with a corresponding 
set of closure rules; but that might be overly ambitious.)

If you like I will try to have a draft in a few days (when I catch up 
with my overdue WG work.)


IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax

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