W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-dev@w3.org > October to December 2006

Re: OWL1.1 APis

From: Matthew Horridge <matthew.horridge@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 09:45:56 +0000
Message-Id: <A3DD4883-901D-4622-8AEA-5E6D2C3E6AE3@cs.man.ac.uk>
To: public-owl-dev@w3.org

On 5 Dec 2006, at 13:13, Bijan Parsia wrote:

> On 4 Dec 2006, at 14:37, fabrizio fasano wrote:
>
>> dear community
>>
>> I've an idea now of editor and reasoners support to OWL1.1
>> it seems to me there is at the moment a BASIC support, being  
>> missing some constructs.
>
> Hmm? I'm not sure what you mean. The reasoner support is quite good  
> with at least two reasoners covering pretty close to all of the  
> language. I can't speak off hand for FaCT++, but Pellet supports it  
> all with the exception of n-ary datatype properties, though that  
> will come.
>
> I would describe editor support as preliminary, at least in Swoop  
> and Protege (but that's partly an artifact of where they are in  
> their development cycles). TopBraid support was waiting on the RDF  
> serialization, but Holger said that, given that support, it is  
> straightforward.
>
> Swoop is sort of waiting on the revision to the OWL API, which is  
> underway. Protege (owl) is moving to a new architecture, with the  
> Manchester variant at least based on the OWL API.
>
>>  What is the state of art of APIs about OWL1.1 ?
>>
>> (ex. wonderweb, jena, protege, ... )
>
> Well, OWL API support will definitely be there. We're already  
> happier having a non-fame based level (the framey flavor is  
> supported as views over the axiomatic ones). Jena support should be  
> straightforward and I imagine that Holger, using Jena, could  
> comment more about that.
>
>> will some of these projects support COMPLETElY owl1.1  
>> specifications in the next year?
>
> Well, most definitely. But was there doubt? I really wouldn't call  
> the reasoner support *basic* for example. It's really quite  
> complete. And if you compare it to the state of OWL implementation  
> even after CR, it's quite favorable and we've not even made it a  
> submission yet.

Just to keep people updated..... The new version of the OWL API  
should be available in the next few weeks (hopefully before Christmas).

Cheers,

Matthew
Received on Thursday, 7 December 2006 14:42:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 27 March 2013 09:32:54 GMT