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

Discussion topics for OWL Full discussion

From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 13:34:20 -0500
Message-Id: <1239B59B-8173-433A-9A82-3F45030C3DED@gmail.com>
To: "Web Ontology Language ((OWL)) Working Group WG" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>

Here are some of the topics kindly put together by Michael Schneider,  
with some editing by Ian and I.

== Desired Outcome ==

* Is there consensus or not in the WG about developing or not  
developing an OWL-Full language?
* If OWL-Full is going to be created, then in which form, and by whom?

== Topic 1: Motivation ==

* What were the reasons for having a Full version in OWL 1.0?
* What is known about existing OWL-Full applications?
* Is 1.1-DL too restricted, and if so where/how?

== Topic 2: Semantics ==

* Do we want to follow Peter's suggestion? (Email: <http:// 
lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2007Dec/0162.html>)
* Is compatibility an aim, and if so what would compatibility mean?
** RDF(S) compatibility?
** Backwards compatibility with OWL 1.0?
** Compatibility with 1.1 DL?

Incompatible changes?
* dropping "syntax reflection"?
* Skolem constants instead of existential variables?

== Topic 3: Development ==

* How do we make it happen (semantics and testcases in the first  
place, also sections in UFDs)
** General approach (e.g. dedicated Full-TF needed?; Wiki based  
development? What should go to the WG's issues and actions lists, and  
what should be more "silent"?)
** Who would have interest in participating, in which form? (creating  
the drafts; reviewing the drafts; writing Full related stuff in  
UFDs; ...)

* schedule

Speak to you Wednesday,

Alan and Ian
Received on Monday, 4 February 2008 18:34:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 4 February 2008 18:34:37 GMT