Same for me. I'm quite new to OWL2, but looking at some of the reasoning that's possible over well thought out ontologies generated by humans is what got me thinking.
In terms of features, I'm building a laundry list of things that OWL2 doesn't support readily. Most of these so far have been numerical concepts or where you might want to represent uncertainty in relationships. This list is long though (!). Once I've finished this feasibility bit, I will post. On Sunday, 2 April 2017 05:51:51 UTC+1, Ed Pell wrote: > > > I am impressed with OWL2 and its support of spatial and temporal > knowledge. HermiT seems to support reasoning over these. What features will > you be adding? > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "opencog" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to opencog+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to opencog@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/3c0e719a-3b60-42f5-8436-8b748b184f32%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
