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

Re: closing ISSUE-22 (special syntax for role rule)

From: Rinke Hoekstra <hoekstra@uva.nl>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 18:41:45 +0200
Cc: "Michael Schneider" <schneid@fzi.de>, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, public-owl-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <A6B2EB5A-99EF-4EF6-8D3F-622FC4E8F993@uva.nl>
To: mak@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de


On 23 apr 2008, at 18:30, Markus Krötzsch wrote:
> I agree, but I think it is not quite so simple. The main issue here  
> might be
> that, while many rules can be expressed in OWL2, some of these  
> encodings
> would violate the structural restrictions without need. I suggest we  
> consider
> at least some special cases of rules here to waive that restriction,  
> and make
> room for future rule interfaces on top of OWL2. I agree that we  
> should not
> make a new rule language (if anything, one would take OWL2 rules to  
> RIF, I
> guess).

Hi Markus,

I guess I agree with you on this point... it would be a shame to have  
the structural restrictions get in the way of something that *can* be  
expressed without changing the semantics. Aren't we then just speccing  
an ill-matched syntax?

How big / numerous do you expect the special cases to be?

-Rinke


>
>
> For people interested in a formal spec of a larger class of "OWL2  
> rules", I
> point to the following works of ours on the topic:
>
> http://korrekt.org/page/SROIQ_rules
> http://korrekt.org/page/ELP
>
> The main work here is to show that one can use rules (hence many  
> other OWL 2
> features) with our tractable profiles without hurting the polynomial
> reasoning. Moreover, there is also the Protege plugin by Francis  
> Gasse (see
> OWLED-Washington papers, joint work with Volker Haarslev and Uli  
> Sattler) to
> actually work with such rules -- maybe more concrete proposals could  
> also
> emerge from that experience?
>
> Regards,
>
> Markus
>
> On Freitag, 18. April 2008, Michael Schneider wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> This has been an interesting exercise for me at that time, and  
>> helped me to
>> better understand the power of sub property chains. It is nice to  
>> see that
>> something like this can actually be expressed within OWL 2 DL. But  
>> directly
>> supporting this as a feature in the OWL language itself would look  
>> rather
>> strange to me.
>>
>> So I concur: +1 for REJECTING this issue.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Michael
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: public-owl-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-owl-wg-request@w3.org 
>>> ]
>>> On Behalf Of Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>>> Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 1:43 PM
>>> To: public-owl-wg@w3.org
>>> Subject: closing ISSUE-22 (special syntax for role rule)
>>>
>>>
>>> On 16 January 2008 Bijan added a note to the proposal for ISSUE-22:
>>>
>>> I think we should close this with no action. Here's why:
>>>
>>> 1) It's a new feature and there is no concrete proposal and I  
>>> spent a
>>> few minutes trying to think of a syntax and had no good one other  
>>> than
>>> the rule itself
>>>
>>> 2) Having just this one rule (which wouldn't be DL safe!) is very
>>> strange and might conflict with rule extensions
>>>
>>> 3) It seems that the best place for this is in a "Decidable swrl
>>> compiler" (as a visitor here was working on). There are *lots* of
>>> rules that you can compile using the new expressive property
>>> axioms. Why *this* one? Just because we thought of it? Better to
>>> encourage the development of these SWRL compilers and leave it to a
>>> "decidable fragments of SWRL" group.
>>>
>>> [Bijan Parsia]
>>>
>>> There does not appear to have been any futher discussion.
>>>
>>> I agree with Bijan's comments, and propose that ISSUE-22 be closed  
>>> in
>>> this fashion.
>>>
>>> Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>>> Bell Labs Research
>
>
>
> -- 
> Markus Krötzsch
> Institut AIFB, Universität Karlsruhe (TH), 76128 Karlsruhe
> phone +49 (0)721 608 7362          fax +49 (0)721 608 5998
> mak@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de          www  http://korrekt.org

-----------------------------------------------
Drs. Rinke Hoekstra

Email: hoekstra@uva.nl    Skype:  rinkehoekstra
Phone: +31-20-5253499     Fax:   +31-20-5253495
Web:   http://www.leibnizcenter.org/users/rinke

Leibniz Center for Law,          Faculty of Law
University of Amsterdam,            PO Box 1030
1000 BA  Amsterdam,             The Netherlands
-----------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 16:42:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 23 April 2008 16:42:25 GMT