W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > April 2008

Re: Profiles intro

From: Carsten Lutz <clu@tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 15:59:45 +0200 (CEST)
To: Alan Wu <alan.wu@oracle.com>
Cc: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Message-id: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0804101552450.27195@frege.inf.tu-dresden.de>

On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, Alan Wu wrote:
>
> Bijan,
>
>> 
>> Ok, I'll rephrase your point: Regardless of whether it's true or not, 
>> RDFishness is not helpful in distinguishing fragments and may cause extreme 
>> negative reactions. Thus, we should find other points for guidance.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Bijan.
> Could you please elaborate on the extreme negative reactions? Triple-friendly 
> is indeed one of the features of OWL R. This allows
> a plain triple store vendor to adopt/add some OWL easily. And I don't see any 
> harm in that.
>
> Of course, I don't intend RDFishness to be *the* distinguishing point or *the 
> only" distinguishing point. OWL R, as designed, does facilitate/encourage
> implementations to materialize inference graph and consequently speed up 
> query execution.

IMHO, the negative reaction is not due to Bijan. Bijan's rephrasing is
precisely how I understood Ivan's paragraphs:

> Ouch. That hurts. This is a Semantic Web ontology, so if an ontology is
> unrelated to RDF triplets, than what does it have to do with this group? I
> do not see why OWL-R would be more RDF-ish than DL Lite or vice versa.
[...]
> > Yes, a main difference between DL-Lite and OWL-R is implementation
> > techniques. Another one is maybe RDF-ishness.
>
> where I strongly disagree.

This can IMHO only mean that we cannot use "RDFishness" to discriminate
between fragments. I think this is a pity because I agree with you that
the proximity to RDF is very important to OWL R, but not of the other
fragments. But meaybe we should simply drop the horrible term "RDFisness"
(which was never intended to make it into the documents anyway) and still 
characterize OWL R by using, among other things, its connection to RDF. 
Ivan?

greetings,
 		Carsten

--
*      Carsten Lutz, Institut f"ur Theoretische Informatik, TU Dresden       *
*     Office phone:++49 351 46339171   mailto:lutz@tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de     *
Received on Thursday, 10 April 2008 15:01:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 10 April 2008 15:01:09 GMT