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

Re: ISSUE-108: Names for Profiles

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 17:26:01 +0100
Message-Id: <573ECBB6-3597-4203-A915-B658C197C5E6@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
To: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>

On 28 Apr 2008, at 17:02, Ian Horrocks wrote:
>
> OK - but can you suggest some other names?

Not really. I personally can live with the current  names...I was  
just trying to report the state of play as I understand it. Nameing  
these suckers is damn hard, I'm finding.

EL++     OWL-Ont
DL Lite  OWL-Rel (for relational?)
OWL-R  OWL-Rul

These have the advantage of being somewhat consistent and equi- 
repellent. The disadvantage is that they are very repellent :(

I guess we could try single letters across the board:

OWL E
OWL D
OWL R

These all potentially scan:

	OWLy
	OWLed
	OWLer

But, that sucks too :(

One could try modeling names on DLP:

OWL EDL (for EL++ DL)
OWL RDL (for relational DL)
OWL DLP (for description logic programs)

Or
	EON (Existential ONtologies, conflicts with the EON workshop)
	RON (Relational ONtolgoies, conflicts with people I know)
	FON (Forwardchaingingrules/Full ONtologies, could be fun)

Ok, I got *nothin*. Sorry. I can live with the current names, I guess.

Cheers,
Bijan.
Received on Monday, 28 April 2008 16:26:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 28 April 2008 16:26:22 GMT