- From: Pascal Hitzler <hitzler@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de>
- Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2009 15:35:42 +0200
- 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 UTC