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

RE: OWL-1.1-Full TF [Was: Introductions]

From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 18:05:34 +0100
Message-ID: <0EF30CAA69519C4CB91D01481AEA06A06C225A@judith.fzi.de>
To: "Alan Ruttenberg" <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Cc: <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Alan Ruttenberg wrote:

>Just a reminder that there is an outstanding action to draft  
>semantics for QCRs. I'd be quite interested in you pooling efforts  
>with Jeremy to make progress on this.

(Ah, my first day in the WG... :))

You certainly mean:

  "ACTION-48: Attempt Wiki sketch of QCR semantics OWL Full"

It's marked as "overdue". Ok! Thanks for pointing me to this. 

This is of course a bit dependent on what the RDF syntax for QCRs will be in
the end. Peter originally found a problem regarding OWL-Full in [1]. You
(Alan) proposed a fix [2], and Peter made this into a proposal [3]. I later
elaborated Peter's original observation into a detailed example which showed
the semantic problems with the current QCR syntax for OWL-Full [4]. I also
gave a second reason for changing the RDF syntax, not related to Full
questions [5]. Later, I had a long discussion with Pat Hayes about
alternative solutions for changing the RDF syntax [6] (Thread). Both,
semantics and coherence of syntax related considerations brought me to the
conclusion [7] that Peter's proposal [2] (perhaps with different naming of
the proposed properties) is the right way to go. I have to note, however,
that Jim Hendler and Pat Hayes argued against this approach for reasons
which I do not fully understand, so I only give the cites here [8][9]
without further commenting.

To summarize: When the RDF syntax for QCRs changes effectively in the way
Peter proposed in [2] (modulo naming), than Jeremy and I, in principle,
could probably finish this action relatively soon. Nevertheless, from an
OWL-Full development perspective, I would rather plea the WG that this
action is dropped or freezed at the moment (whatever is formally possible),
since it is really something like an "implementation detail" of the OWL-Full
spec (I do not find a better name at the moment). Otherwise, we could bring
up a big list of actions like:

  "Attempt Wiki sketch of ?x semantics OWL-Full"  

where '?x' stands for

  * sub property chains
  * asymmetric properties
  * self restrictions
  * data ranges
  * ...

The Full-TF will first have to make certain decisions on overall concepts,
before going into the details of specifying the semantics for specific


[1] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2007Dec/0095.html>
[2] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2007Dec/0105.html>
[3] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2007Dec/0161.html>

Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider
FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik Karlsruhe
Abtl. Information Process Engineering (IPE)
Tel  : +49-721-9654-726
Fax  : +49-721-9654-727
Email: Michael.Schneider@fzi.de
Web  : http://www.fzi.de/ipe/eng/mitarbeiter.php?id=555

FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe
Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe
Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959
Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
Az: 14-0563.1 Regierungspräsidium Karlsruhe
Vorstand: Rüdiger Dillmann, Michael Flor, Jivka Ovtcharova, Rudi Studer
Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus

Received on Monday, 14 January 2008 17:05:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:02 UTC