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

Re: intendedProfile (ISSUE-111)

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:23:33 -0400
To: "Boris Motik" <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Cc: "'OWL Working Group WG'" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <31502.1214508213@ubuhebe> 


> The language is designed such that OWL Full and OWL DL semantics largely coin
> cide for syntactically OWL DL ontologies. Authors
> intending their ontologies to be interpreted with OWL Full semantics can easi
> ly add content that is syntactically OWL Full.

Yes, but are we willing to formalize that -- to say that the OWL Full
semantics do not apply if the OWL DL syntactic restrictions hold?

Or is OWL 2 doomed to be a language where one expression has multiple
meanings?  

     - Sandro
Received on Thursday, 26 June 2008 19:25:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 June 2008 19:25:08 GMT