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

Re: ISSUE-108: Names for Profiles

From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 May 2008 03:55:04 -0400
Cc: Carsten Lutz <clu@tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de>, mak@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de, Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>, Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <2D344E28-9D29-4F00-ABC1-658EBD6D7C2D@gmail.com>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>

I don't endorse Barry's suggestions - I was just passing them on. As I  
said, I'm spreading the word around asking for suggestions - perhaps  
others have ideas about others outside the WG who might have ideas as  
well.

Best,
Alan

On May 2, 2008, at 3:42 AM, Ivan Herman wrote:

> Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
>> Barry Smith offers
>> OWL Classes
>> OWL Instances
>> OLW Rules
>> Of what I've seen, I like the single letter names. But really, I  
>> think we need a marketer to help us figure this out, as my sense is  
>> that we're all so close to the history that we won't be able to  
>> appreciate what it's going to be like for the majority who use owl,  
>> who don't know it. I'm spreading the word....
>
> Although I agree with the marketer's issue, I think the names by  
> Barry are really bad, I am sorry:-( As an outsider my immediate  
> reaction would be that if I use 'OWL Instances' that means I could  
> not use OWL Classes... Let alone the fact that if I have a sentence  
> saying 'OWL Classes bla bla', how do I know whether I refer to OWL  
> Classes in terms of the concept of owl:Class or whether I refer to a  
> profile?
>
> Ivan
>
>> -Alan
>> On May 1, 2008, at 4:41 AM, Carsten Lutz wrote:
>>> On Thu, 1 May 2008, Ivan Herman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Markus Krötzsch wrote:
>>>>> Not caring about any particular name or pronunciation, I still  
>>>>> think name changes would really be in order. Main requirements  
>>>>> are:
>>>>> * unified naming: profile names should look somewhat similar in  
>>>>> shape,
>>>>> * avoid non-letter symbols ("+")
>>>>> * avoid "Lite"
>>>>> I would be happy with Bijan's one-letter version (E, D, R). At  
>>>>> least these are easily recognised as smaller profiles.
>>>>> For a two-letter version, I would prefer: EL, DB, LP.
>>>>> (Some of these might be too close to "DL")
>>>>
>>>> EL and DB sounds actually good to me (sorry Markus, I prefer the  
>>>> two-letter alternatives:-)
>>>>
>>>> For the third, LB is not bad; another alternative may be  
>>>> 'RL' (for rules) although it is not necessarily easy to  
>>>> pronounce...
>>>
>>> Out of the current one-, two-, and three-letter proposals, I very  
>>> much
>>> favour the two-letter ones. "EL" and "DB" are very natural and  
>>> under-
>>> standable for EL++ and DL-Lite, and to me "RL" is also fine for  
>>> OWL-R.
>>> In principle, of course, we do not need the sumber of letters for  
>>> each
>>> profile and could use "EL", "DB", and "R". I slightly prefer "RL",
>>> though.
>>>
>>> greetings,
>>>        Carsten
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I.
>>>>
>>>>> Three-letter alternatives were already given by Bijan.
>>>>> I prefer the one-letter names. They are least likely to be  
>>>>> confused with each other or other OWL versions, and they are  
>>>>> uniform, easy to remember, and not taken in the literature.
>>>>> -- Markus
>>>>> P.S.: I generally oppose the use of "OWL Rules" and anything  
>>>>> very similar. There are existing approaches (yes, including my  
>>>>> own works, but also the Protege plugin presented at OWLED DC  
>>>>> [Gasse/Sattler/Haarslev]) that allow much more rules/rule syntax  
>>>>> in OWL 2. We should avoid the confusion. Also, future OWL/RIF  
>>>>> efforts may have to say more about rules for/with OWL.
>>>>> On Montag, 28. April 2008, Carsten Lutz wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2008, Bijan Parsia wrote:
>>>>>>> On 28 Apr 2008, at 17:02, Ian Horrocks wrote:
>>>>>>>> OK - but can you suggest some other names?
>>>>>>> Not really. I personally can live with the current  names...
>>>>>> So can I.
>>>>>>> I was just trying
>>>>>>> to report the state of play as I understand it. Nameing these  
>>>>>>> suckers is
>>>>>>> damn hard, I'm finding.
>>>>>> Absolutely.
>>>>>>> EL++     OWL-Ont
>>>>>> If we want to change the name, it would have to be sth like  
>>>>>> this, I
>>>>>> guess. The problem with an alternative name for EL++ is that its
>>>>>> distinguishing feature is that it is more a real ontology  
>>>>>> language
>>>>>> than the other fragments. But then, it feels strange to  
>>>>>> emphasize that
>>>>>> property since, after all, what we are standardizing *is*  
>>>>>> ontology
>>>>>> languages.
>>>>>>> DL Lite  OWL-Rel (for relational?)
>>>>>> I find that a little misleading. Speaking about relations is not
>>>>>> exactly one of DL Lite's strengths (unless the relations are  
>>>>>> unary).
>>>>>>> OWL-R  OWL-Rul
>>>>>> Made me laugh, but maybe it only sounds funny in German. :)
>>>>>> I would propose names here if I could come up with good  
>>>>>> suggestions,
>>>>>> but I can't. Since, as Ian says, the names are already in wide
>>>>>> circulation, sticking with the existing names may not be the  
>>>>>> worst
>>>>>> choice.
>>>>>> greetings,
>>>>>>         Carsten
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> *      Carsten Lutz, Institut f"ur Theoretische Informatik, TU  
>>>>>> Dresden * *     Office phone:++49 351 46339171   mailto:lutz@tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de
>>>>>>    *
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>>
>>>> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
>>>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
>>>> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
>>>> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> *      Carsten Lutz, Institut f"ur Theoretische Informatik, TU  
>>> Dresden       *
>>> *     Office phone:++49 351 46339171   mailto:lutz@tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de 
>>>      *
>
> -- 
>
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>
Received on Friday, 2 May 2008 07:55:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 2 May 2008 07:55:41 GMT