W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-dev@w3.org > July to September 2008

Re: Intersection of properties?

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 20:17:35 +0100
Message-Id: <4809061D-BCA6-4091-A950-D2D41D827912@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>, public-owl-dev@w3.org
To: Jeff Thompson <jeff@thefirst.org>

On Aug 3, 2008, at 7:58 PM, Jeff Thompson wrote:
> I sounds like many implementors

No, it doesn't sound like that. Those were all theory papers.

> see that even OWL 2 is not expressive
> enough to solve their data processing needs, and so everyone has
> their own extensions in Pellet, etc.

? No. The implementation of ALBO is not, by any means, production  
quality (or would purport to be even vaguely scalable to realistic  
kbs). There's only one, sorta implementation of PDL (Peter's DLP,  
which is sorta defunct).

So, I don't know where you're getting this from :)

> And yet, the argument against
> adding more expressiveness to OWL 2 (still decidable) is the fear
> that not enough people will implement it and so that "OWL 2 compliant"
> won't mean much.

What? The argument against boolean role boxes, in general, is that  
it's relatively hard to do and there's been relatively little demand  
for it. ALBO is *very* expressive but, you know, doesn't have  
cardinality restrictions.

I personally don't feel a burning desire for role conjunction.  
Perhaps you could list use cases?

> I know it's a difficult political task to balance.
> Is the general assumption that there will need to be several more
> revision cycles to OWL before a large number of people will use it
> as specified without needing to add their own incompatible extensions?

I think you're confused. OWL already is used by a large number of  
people without needing to add their own incompatible extensions. If  
you have a strong need for very expressive role boxes, I suggest you  
submit a paper to OWLED detailing your needs.

Received on Sunday, 3 August 2008 19:18:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:58:17 UTC