W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > August 2009

Re: Explain profile acronyms

From: Pascal Hitzler <hitzler@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de>
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2009 15:35:42 +0200
Message-ID: <4A798AAE.2010303@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de>
To: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu>
CC: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, Jie Bao <baojie@cs.rpi.edu>, Uli Sattler <sattler@cs.man.ac.uk>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, public-owl-wg@w3.org
okay, I changed it into the wording you suggest below.

Diff (to our original version): 
http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=Primer&diff=25100&oldid=25085

Pascal.

Jim Hendler wrote:
> umm, okay, but I think you may have gone overboard (up to you) -- you 
> changed
> 
>> By and large, different profiles can be distinguished syntactically 
>> with there being inclusion relations between various profiles. For 
>> example, OWL 2 DL can be seen as a syntactic fragment of OWL 2 Full 
>> and OWL 2 QL is a syntactic fragment of OWL 2 DL (and thus of OWL 2 
>> Full). Each of the profiles presented below is a (strict) syntactic 
>> subset of OWL DL, but none of these profiles is a subset of another. 
>> Ideally, one can use a reasoner (or other tool) that is conforming for 
>> a superprofile on the subprofile with no change in the results 
>> derived. For profiles such as OWL 2 EL and OWL 2 QL in relation to OWL 
>> 2 DL this principle does hold: Every conforming OWL 2 DL reasoner is 
>> an OWL 2 EL and OWL 2 QL reasoner (but may differ in performance since 
>> the OWL 2 DL reasoner is tuned for a more general set of cases). 
> 
> to
> 
>> Note that none of the profiles below is a subset of another.
> 
> but my complaint would have been fixed with 
> 
> By and large, different profiles can be distinguished syntactically with 
> there being inclusion relations between various profiles. For example, 
> OWL 2 DL can be seen as a syntactic fragment of OWL 2 Full and OWL 2 QL 
> is a syntactic fragment of OWL 2 DL (and thus of OWL 2 Full). None of 
> these profiles below is a subset of another. Ideally, one can use a 
> reasoner (or other tool) that is conforming for a superprofile on the 
> subprofile with no change in the results derived. For profiles  OWL 2 EL 
> and OWL 2 QL in relation to OWL 2 DL this principle does hold: Every 
> conforming OWL 2 DL reasoner is an OWL 2 EL and OWL 2 QL reasoner (but 
> may differ in performance since the OWL 2 DL reasoner is tuned for a 
> more general set of cases). 
> 
> it was only the one particular sentence that had been added that I was 
> asking about
>   -JH
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Aug 5, 2009, at 6:25 AM, Pascal Hitzler wrote:
> 
>> (it evades me, but) done.
>>
>> Diff: 
>> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=Primer&diff=25098&oldid=25085 
>> <http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=Primer&diff=25098&oldid=25085>
>>
>> Pascal.
>>
>> Jim Hendler wrote:
>>> Pascal -
>>> You clearly misunderstood me, the sentence you put in the primer is:
>>> Each of the profiles presented below is a (strict) syntactic subset 
>>> of OWL DL, but none of these profiles is a subset of another.
>>> which is the sentence I am having the problem with! --  the second 
>>> part of my response was added to this sentence so as to clarfiy - so 
>>> you've made exactly the change I raised my complaint about...
>>> My first choice would be to do what Ian did in the profiles document 
>>> (simply take out the part about syntactic subset and include the second),
>>> my second choice would be to add a new sentence that fixes the issue 
>>> that I am having a problem with  (but I agree with Ian that coming up 
>>> with something everyone would be happy with would be too much work 
>>> and too major a change)
>>> so be good if we could simply go to the change as Ian suggested
>>> thanks
>>> -Jim H.
>>> On Aug 4, 2009, at 5:59 PM, Pascal Hitzler wrote:
>>>> In the primer, the wording is already exactly as the first part of 
>>>> Jim's  second  suggestion. So no further changes to the primer at 
>>>> this stage.
>>>>
>>>> Pascal.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ian Horrocks wrote:
>>>>> IMHO this would be a larger and more controversial change than we 
>>>>> should be making at this stage.
>>>>> I think that the best solution is the last one suggested by Jim -- 
>>>>> to simply say that "none of these profiles is a subset of another". 
>>>>> I have updated the document (and response) accordingly. Hopefully 
>>>>> Pascal can do the same for the Primer.
>>>>> Ian
>>>>> On 4 Aug 2009, at 16:19, Jie Bao wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 9:20 AM, Jim Hendler<hendler@cs.rpi.edu 
>>>>>> <mailto:hendler@cs.rpi.edu>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note that each of the profiles is a (strict)  syntactic 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> subset of OWL
>>>>>>>>>>>>> DL, but none of the profiles is a subset of  another
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While the above is technically correct,  I think that some people 
>>>>>>> would miss
>>>>>>> the fact that "syntactic" subsets of OWL 2  DL is different than 
>>>>>>> the fact
>>>>>>> that you must use the DL restrictions (esp for RL) - so I'd 
>>>>>>> suggest one of
>>>>>>> the following three rewordings:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Note that each of the profiles is a (strict) syntactic subset of 
>>>>>>> OWL 2's
>>>>>>> syntax, but none of the profiles is a subset of each other 
>>>>>>>  [[i.e. since
>>>>>>> syntactically OWL DL and OWL Full are same thing, why bring up 
>>>>>>> the issue]]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Note that each of the profiles is a (strict) syntactic subset of 
>>>>>>> OWL 2 DL
>>>>>>> and none of the profiles is a subset of another.  We note that 
>>>>>>> OWL RL is
>>>>>>> expected to be used primarily with OWL Full semantics, the others 
>>>>>>> with OWL
>>>>>>> DL. [[which is clear, but I suspect controversial]]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think the last sentence is important. It would be confusing if we
>>>>>> just say RL is a syntactic subset of DL, but its reasoning rules are
>>>>>> in the RDF semantics. It might be bizarre to explain to some
>>>>>> RDF-minded that why in RL we can't say hasBrother (transitive) and
>>>>>> hasSister (transitive) are disjoint, or hasBrother is irreflexive, but
>>>>>> we may still apply RL inference rules to an OWL Full ontology that
>>>>>> says so.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jie
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> just say
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> None of these profiles is a subset of another [[and avoid the 
>>>>>>> whole issue]]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm sorry, but I do consider the quoted line above to a problem, 
>>>>>>> and one I
>>>>>>> cannot ignore....
>>>>>>> -Jim H.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Aug 4, 2009, at 6:42 AM, Ian Horrocks wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This seems like a good compromise.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have made the relevant changes. The diff is:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=Profiles&diff=25048&oldid=24645 
>>>>>>>> <http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=Profiles&diff=25048&oldid=24645> 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Ian
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 4 Aug 2009, at 10:59, Uli Sattler wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 3 Aug 2009, at 21:51, Pascal Hitzler wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I would really stick to the real/historic explanation (EL family).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> we could also add "which is called EL because it is a 
>>>>>>>>> *l*anguage (or
>>>>>>>>> *l*logic) that only provides *e*xistential quantification of 
>>>>>>>>> variables."?
>>>>>>>>> Cheers, Uli
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I understand that it's not directly helpful, but at least it 
>>>>>>>>>> becomes
>>>>>>>>>> clear that there is some reason to it - and in case somebody 
>>>>>>>>>> wants to read
>>>>>>>>>> up on it on the DL literature, he's not lost in the DL 
>>>>>>>>>> acronyms ...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In fact I'll add this to the primer as soon as the wiki is 
>>>>>>>>>> accessible
>>>>>>>>>> again (it currently seems to be down...)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Pascal.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sandro Hawke wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I certainly see no problem with adding some minor 
>>>>>>>>>>>> explanatory text
>>>>>>>>>>>> along these lines.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It seems good to me, too, except for the EL explanation.  The 
>>>>>>>>>>> reference
>>>>>>>>>>> to EL++ doesn't help anyone.  (If you know about EL++, you 
>>>>>>>>>>> don't need
>>>>>>>>>>> the explanation; if you don't know about EL++, then knowing the
>>>>>>>>>>> association doesn't help.)
>>>>>>>>>>> So where does the "E" come from?  I guess it's from "Existential
>>>>>>>>>>> Restrictions"...  That doesn't help very much here.  Maybe we can
>>>>>>>>>>> propose a mnemonic?  "Extensive", "Efficient", "Easy", 
>>>>>>>>>>> "Economical",
>>>>>>>>>>> "Enormous", "Elephantine"...  :-)
>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe something like:
>>>>>>>>>>> - The EL profile was orginally named for its use of Existential
>>>>>>>>>>> restrictions, but for a mnemonic, we note that it supports
>>>>>>>>>>> Efficient reasoning, even with Enormous ontologies.
>>>>>>>>>>> ... or something like that.
>>>>>>>>>>> -- Sandro
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk 
>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Explain profile acronyms
>>>>>>>>>>>> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 11:40:57 -0500
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> IMHO this is a not completely unreasonable request. I would 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> propose
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to respond by adding to the Introduction of Profiles:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> * brief explanations of the acronyms, namely:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - The EL acronym reflects the profile's basis in the EL 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> family of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> description logics [EL++].
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - The QL acronym reflects the fact that query answering in this
>>>>>>>>>>>>> profile can implemented by rewriting queries into a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> standard  relational
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Query Language.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - The RL acronym reflects the fact that reasoning in this 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> profile
>>>>>>>>>>>>> can be implemented using a standard Rule Language.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> * the statement "Note that each of the profiles is a (strict)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> syntactic subset of OWL DL, but none of the profiles is a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> subset of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> another."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Comments and/or other suggestions?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ian
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Gioele Barabucci <barabucc@cs.unibo.it 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:barabucc@cs.unibo.it>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 14:54:08 +0200
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: public-owl-comments@w3.org 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:public-owl-comments@w3.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Message-ID: <20090720125407.GA32507@cs.unibo.it 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:20090720125407.GA32507@cs.unibo.it>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could you please document the meaning of the EL, QL and DL 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> acronyms
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the overview section of owl2-profiles and other OWL 2 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> documents?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also, could you explicitly state whether an OWL 2 profile is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strict
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> subset of another?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gioele Barabucci <barabucc@cs.unibo.it 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:barabucc@cs.unibo.it>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>>> PD Dr. Pascal Hitzler
>>>>>>>>>> pascal@pascal-hitzler.de   http://www.pascal-hitzler.de
>>>>>>>>>> Semantic Web Textbook: http://www.semantic-web-book.org
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other 
>>>>>>> things, not
>>>>>>> because they are easy, but because they are hard - John F. 
>>>>>>> Kennedy, Sept 12,
>>>>>>> 1962
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Prof James Hendler
>>>>>>>  http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~hendler
>>>>>>> Tetherless World Constellation Chair & Asst Dean of IT and Web 
>>>>>>> Science
>>>>>>> Computer and Cognitive Science Depts
>>>>>>> Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY 12180 
>>>>>>>         @jahendler, twitter
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> Jie Bao
>>>>>> http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~baojie
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> PD Dr. Pascal Hitzler
>>>> pascal@pascal-hitzler.de   http://www.pascal-hitzler.de
>>>> Semantic Web Textbook: http://www.semantic-web-book.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>> We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, 
>>> not because they are easy, but because they are hard - John F. 
>>> Kennedy, Sept 12, 1962
>>> Prof James Hendler 
>>>                                http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~hendler
>>> Tetherless World Constellation Chair & Asst Dean of IT and Web Science
>>> Computer and Cognitive Science Depts
>>> Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY 12180         @jahendler, 
>>> twitter
>>
>> -- 
>> PD Dr. Pascal Hitzler
>> pascal@pascal-hitzler.de   http://www.pascal-hitzler.de
>> Semantic Web Textbook: http://www.semantic-web-book.org
>>
> 
> We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not 
> because they are easy, but because they are hard - John F. Kennedy, Sept 
> 12, 1962
> 
> Prof James Hendler http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~hendler
> Tetherless World Constellation Chair & Asst Dean of IT and Web Science
> Computer and Cognitive Science Depts
> Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY 12180      @jahendler, twitter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
PD Dr. Pascal Hitzler
pascal@pascal-hitzler.de   http://www.pascal-hitzler.de
Semantic Web Textbook: http://www.semantic-web-book.org
Received on Wednesday, 5 August 2009 13:33:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 5 August 2009 13:33:07 GMT