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

Re: Explain profile acronyms

From: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 15:46:23 +0100
Message-Id: <EBD59282-5271-42DF-AF68-52EB28E67F90@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Cc: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu>, 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
To: Pascal Hitzler <hitzler@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de>
Great -- thanks!

I substituted this diff for the one previously given in the draft  
response [1]. Hopefully we are now *really* ready to go with this  
response.

Ian

[1] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/LC3_Responses/GB1


On 5 Aug 2009, at 14:35, Pascal Hitzler wrote:

> 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 14:47:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 5 August 2009 14:47:33 GMT