[OWL] [1.1] Second version of OWL 1.1 feature list

[Uli Sattler]

On 8 Dec 2005, at 14:32, Bijan Parsia wrote:

> On Dec 8, 2005, at 2:17 PM, Uli Sattler wrote:
> [snip]
>
>> a) admissible and
>> b) for which we can find a "conforming" syntax
>>
>> Point (a) is clearly specified, and it ensures that reasoning  
>> remains decidable and that it can always be done "in the same  
>> way", regardless of the specific dataype in question: simply (?)  
>> plug in a datatype reasoner for your datatype into the OWL- 
>> reasoner, and you have an OWL-reasoner that can handle your datatype.
> [snip]
>
> We should separate these two points.

sure - this is why I made them ;)

> As long as the reasoning can be done in this oracular manner, why  
> not give the users the rope to hang themselves? (I would suggest  
> rather fine grained checking would be required, but even dangerous  
> features could be used safely and detectible so.)

I am not sure I know what you mean...do you mean that we should allow  
all kinds of datatypes, as long as they are admissible/oraclable?  
This would be great -- but how can we "fix the meaning" of a  
datatype? I.e., can I "export"/'describe" my datatype? or do I simply  
ship a datatype-reasoner with an ontology using a custom-built datatype?

Cheers, Uli



>
> Cheers,
> Bijan.
>
> _______________________________________________
> OWL mailing list
> OWL at lists.mindswap.org
> http://lists.mindswap.org/mailman/listinfo/owl