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

Fragments discussion

From: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 23:14:17 +0000
Message-Id: <3E627DAF-245D-4CA1-A30A-F2204716AD0B@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
To: Web Ontology Language ((OWL)) Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>

In an effort to get us thinking and to structure our discussion we  
came up with the following list of questions/topics (see http:// 
Although we don't expect to make any firm decisions, we do hope to  
reach agreement on some general directions.

Note that as this is a large and as yet relatively little discussed  
topic we have allowed 45 minutes. This may mean postponing some or  
all issue related matters to next week.

     *  There are (at least) two aspects to this discussion: Language  
Fragments, defined in terms of (restrictions on) the (structural)  
syntax, and Conformance levels, defined in terms of implementation  
           o Do we understand and agree with this distinction?
     * "Rule based" fragments such as OWLPrime.
           o Review of current status.
           o What are the language fragment and conformance level  
     * OWL-Lite
           o Do we want to retain a/the OWL-Lite?
           o Is there a backwards compatibility issue?
           o How would it relate to other fragments?
     * Number of fragments
           o Should we limit the number of fragments?
           o If so, why and to how many?
           o Are some fragments more or less compelling than others  
(e.g., in terms of implementer experience and utility)?
     * Documentation
           o Should a/the tractable fragments document be REC track?
           o Is the existing tractable fragments document appropriate?
           o Do we need additional user facing documentation for the  

Ian and Alan
Received on Monday, 28 January 2008 23:14:29 UTC

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