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

RDFS 3.0 and Oracle OWL Prime (was Re: wiki page on fragments extended)

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 08:21:34 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20071126.082134.193992818.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: hendler@cs.rpi.edu
Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org

From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu>
Subject: Re: wiki page on fragments extended
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 12:48:34 -0500

> Uli - I should have included the URI - it's http://www.w3.org/2007/ 
> OWL/wiki/Fragments - not connected to the Tractable Fragments  
> document since I didn't think it belonged there at this point
>   -JH

This page claims that the constructs in the RDFS 3.0 proposal are
"almost identical to those included in Oracle's OWL Prime", but the most
complete information I can find
http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/DatabaseAndOntology/2007-10-18_AlanWu/RDBMS-RDFS-OWL-InferenceEngine--AlanWu_20071018.pdf
indicates that OWL Prime includes hasValue, allValuesFrom,
someValuesFrom, and complementOf which are not in the RDFS 3.0 proposal.
The addition of these constructs makes OWL Prime very different from the
proposed RDFS 3.0.

The other OWL subsets supported by Oracle also appear to be quite
different from the proposed RDFS 3.0.  OWLSIF appears to include
hasValue, allValuesFrom, and someValuesFrom (as they are in pD*).
RDFS++ appears to only add sameAs and InverseFunctionalProperty to RDFS.

So, although RDFS 3.0 may indeed be a reasonable fragment, I do not
think that it can be justified by claims that its constructs are similar
to what Oracle supports.


Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Bell Labs Research
Received on Monday, 26 November 2007 13:38:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:13:27 GMT