(My interpretation of the situation, Ian's may be a bit different) Jonathan Rees wrote: [snip] > > By 'any OWL 2 ontology' do you mean any instance of the Ontology UML class? > That is a good way of putting it, yes > What is encompassed by 'OWL 2 - the entire language' ? E.g. would an > OWL/XML document belong to 'OWL 2 - the entire language' ? > OWL/XML is serialization syntax so it is pretty much orthogonal to this naming. An OWL/XML, by its very definition, can be translated into FS, so it represents an OWL 2 Ontology. But there are RDF graphs that use OWL 2 vocabulary terms (and for which the RDF semantics gives semantics) that cannot be translated into an OWL 2 Ontology. Not many exist of those, and the requirements are described in the 3rd section on the Structure and Syntax document. Those RDF graphs are part of the entire language of OWL 2, but are not OWL2 Ontologies. Note that both the conformance document and the 'informal' terminology refers to _RDF graphs_ when talking about OWL 2 Full. Ivan > Jonathan > > -- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Wednesday, 25 March 2009 06:18:15 UTC