RDF semantics, access control description and timeranges
wkearney99 at h...
Sun Dec 15 17:55:26 UTC 2002
> I'm with you here. We definitely need some kind of default reasoning.
> The decision has been made, AFAIK, that this will not be in RDF or in
> OWL. If we need it, we will have to do it outside of RDF and OWL.
This is something that needs clarification. Or at least discussion. In looking
at how to express both RDF and XML schema for data I find myself confused on
what I can or can't say in each of them. It's beyond the scope of each to
comment about the other but the users (like myself) want to do a little of what
each provides. How to tell when one drops the ball and if the other can pick it
up is quite a mystery (to me anyway).
> I think the confusion is on the natural language side (which is
> probably closely related to our common sense reasoning). Most people
> would take the following two sentences to have the same meaning:
> My computer accepts http, ftp and ssh connections
> My computer accepts http, ftp or ssh connections
And how to write schemata that indicate this is a question new developers are
very likely to ask about. It feels like we're *so close* to being able to do
this. I just want to know what means to use to express it.
More information about the foaf-dev