Porp 028 owl 20040323

["Max Voskob" <max.voskob@paradise.net.nz>]

John,

Lines 135-137

You say that we go with a subset of OWL Full, but given the number of
elements allowed in the UDDI OWL it is not a superset for OWL lite.
Basically, the ontologies will have to be written for UDDI specifically and
very few ontologies fully complient to any flavour of OWL will be valid for
the UDDI OWL.
Please, correct me if I'm wrong.

Lines 413-414

You suggest a restriction on rdf:ID values which will also require
redevelopment of ontologies to make them valid for the UDDI OWL.

Genral comments

How these ontologies will be used?
Will they be parsed by a UDDI server and used for searches?
Do we plan any additional API for this?

Do we get enough improvement in UDDI capabilites to warrant the
implementation effort If we restrict OWL to something that is neither Lite
nor Full?

Sorry for asking so many questions. :-)

Cheers,
Max