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

ISSUE-76 (DLP): REPORTED: DLP

From: OWL Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 17:16:16 +0000 (GMT)
To: public-owl-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <20071128171616.09F73C6DB0@barney.w3.org>


ISSUE-76 (DLP): REPORTED: DLP

http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/

Raised by: Bijan Parsia
On product: 

(On behalf of Carsten Lutz.)

I would like to raise the question whether we really want DLP in the
document. In my understanding, the history of DLP is as follows:

- the origin was an academic exercise: to understand what one gets
  when taking the common part of logic programming and OWL

- the answer was (in my very personal opinion; never mind): nothing
  very useful

- ontologies written in DLP have never shown up (I am happy to
  stand corrected)

- it was superceeded by Horn-SHIQ of which it is fragment (right?),
  and which is also in the document (where it is not really visible
  that DLP is a fragment of Horn-SHIQ).

I can see that the connection between logic programming and OWL is
important, for a number of reasons. Still, I feel that DLP is an odd
fragment and that we would do better to drop it. When discussing
Horn-SHIQ, we could still mention that the intersection of logic
programming and OWL is contained in it.

If anybody wants to make a case for DLP, go ahead. I only want to
avoid that we include fragments that nobody really supports.
Received on Wednesday, 28 November 2007 17:16:21 GMT

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