W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > November 2007

Proliferation of types

From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 22:12:19 -0500
Message-Id: <552FDA7E-CC90-4ED4-A7B3-711D678766CE@cs.rpi.edu>
To: OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>

In separate discussions with Bijan (via chat) and Boris, I've raised  
the issue that from a Web language usage point of view, the  
proliferation of typing terms is a problem (the size of the OWL  
language will now be twice what it was, which is a way to discourage  
usage IMO).  - A couple of ideas have come up.  It appears to be that  
if we could either have a way to enumerate all the classes and  
properties in an ontology (both local and remote) or if we could do  
some language design to simplify things -- for example, to make this  
one feature in the RDF with some keys -- ie. some thing like having  
one Datayping property construct to which the many different types  
are key attiributes or something like that.  Boris and I also agreed  
that we could not think of any reason why anyone would ever want a  
datatype and an objecttype property with the same name -- so if we  
added to the OWL namespace document that these two kinds of  
properties are disjoint, then we would be able to rule out the case  
of a consistent ontology ever having this done, which would therefore  
make parsing/processing easier, and we might not need so many  
property types.
  (apologies to Bijan and Boris for any misquoting I've done in  
explaining what I thought we said)
  I have created a wiki page for this at "PropertyProliferationControl
Received on Tuesday, 13 November 2007 03:12:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:00 UTC