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

Re: status of ISSUE-79 ?

From: Carsten Lutz <clu@tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 08:03:31 +0100 (CET)
To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
Message-id: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0803170800400.28516@frege.inf.tu-dresden.de>

On Sun, 16 Mar 2008, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
> Hi Carsten,

Hi Alan,

> Given that the fragments document is shaping up, I wonder what the state of 
> this issue is? The feature overview lists both domains/ranges and property 
> inclusions. So is this issue ready to close?

>From my perspective, this issue was resolved by my wiki page on EL++
which was then migrated into the fragments document and which gives
details about the new version of EL++ that I mention in ISSUE-78.  The
corresponding results and proofs are in an OWLED DC paper. So I am
in favour of closing.


> -Alan
>> There are at least two versions of EL++ that are tractable. These
>> two versions are incomparable in expressive power, and the current
>> document lists only one of them. The fragment that is not listed
>> offers both domain and range restrictions and captures, for example,
>> the ontology NCI. What it does not have is role inclusions.
>> An obvious remedy would be to list both fragments of EL++. However, I
>> have hope that we can do better. We might be able to give a fragment
>> that (unlike the one listed at the moment) truely resides inside OWL
>> 1.1, that has domain and range restrictions, and that has (acyclic)
>> role inclusions and is still tractable. *This* is actually the
>> fragment that I think should be OWL Light (see ISSUE-78 on
>> tractable fragments).  I need some time to work out details.

*      Carsten Lutz, Institut f"ur Theoretische Informatik, TU Dresden       *
*     Office phone:++49 351 46339171   mailto:lutz@tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de     *
Received on Monday, 17 March 2008 07:04:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:03 UTC