- From: Christopher Welty <[email protected]>
- Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 09:30:36 -0400
- To: [email protected]
My only response is a general one: Description logics had an unfortunate historical tradition to refer to "relations" as "roles". This was, I think, an accident of how DLs evolved. I was hoping we could fix this now that DLs are being presented to the world. Instead of fixing it by referring to "relations" with that term, we are now using "property." In logic, when I learned it, properties are unary predicates. If we are talking about relations, why aren't we calling them relations? Dr. Christopher A. Welty, Knowledge Structures Group IBM Watson Research Center, 19 Skyline Dr. Hawthorne, NY 10532 USA Voice: +1 914.784.7055, IBM T/L: 863.7055 Fax: +1 914.784.6078, Email: [email protected] Deborah McGuinness <[email protected]> Sent by: [email protected] 05/14/2002 01:14 AM To: Webont <[email protected]> cc: Subject: Compliance Level 1 Proposal At the last telecon, I took the action item to produce a compliance level 1 document by today. The document is available at: http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/compliance.html Please review it so that it can be discussed at this thursday's webont telecon. Comments as usual to webont. thanks, Deborah -- Deborah L. McGuinness Knowledge Systems Laboratory Gates Computer Science Building, 2A Room 241 Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-9020 email: [email protected] URL: http://ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm (voice) 650 723 9770 (stanford fax) 650 725 5850 (computer fax) 801 705 0941
Received on Tuesday, 14 May 2002 09:31:19 UTC