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

(second) draft response for LC comment 14

From: Mike Smith <msmith@clarkparsia.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 10:19:51 -0500
Message-ID: <42485a40902180719x722c4559u300cdfcfa4ae2354@mail.gmail.com>
To: W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Dear Mike,

Thank you for your message
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2009Jan/0031.html on
the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts.

The OWL Direct Model-Theoretic Semantics [1] defines entailment in
terms of interpretations and requires that all URIs in an ontology are
present in the vocabulary of any interpretation satisfying that
ontology. The OWL 2 Direct Semantics [2] document defines entailment
in terms of models, a change which relaxes the vocabulary constraint.
The change is intentional -- it is useful because it permits
tautologies to be entailed by the empty ontology and simplifies the
semantic specification.

The difference is demonstrated by the test case you have cited [3].
This test is a positive entailment under the OWL 2 Direct Semantics,
but was a negative entailment under the OWL Direct Model-Theoretic
Semantics used when the WebOnt WG approved the test case.

The definition of entailment in the OWL 2 Direct Semantics document
will not be changed in response to your comment.

Mike Smith

Clark & Parsia

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/direct.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Direct_Semantics#Inference_Problems
[3] http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/Class/Manifest005#test
Received on Wednesday, 18 February 2009 15:20:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:09 UTC