W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > March 2010

RE: RIF RDF and OWL Compatibility and OWL Semantics

From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 16:31:51 +0100
Message-ID: <0EF30CAA69519C4CB91D01481AEA06A001BB0B2A@judith.fzi.de>
To: "OWL 2" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Cc: "Ian Horrocks" <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Hi!

I had a look at chapters 4 ("OWL Compatibility") and 6 ("Conformance
Clauses"). My overall impression was fine, but I found that there are still
a few issues that should probably be reported.

  1) Chapter 4: In the whole chapter, the terms "direct semantics",
"RDF-Based semantics", "structural specification", and "RDF semantics" are
repeatedly written in lower case (as written in this sentence). In the OWL 2
documents, however, these terms are generally in upper case, as in "Direct
Semantics"; see for example the OWL 2 Overview
<http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview/>. I believe the RIF document should
follow this practice.

  2) Chapter 4, 4th paragraph, first sentence: This sentence talks about the
RDF mapping, but misses a citation to our "Mapping to RDF" document.

  3) Section 4.2: The titles of the subsections are given as "OWL RDF-Based
Semantics" and "OWL Direct Semantics", i.e., the "2" of "OWL 2" is missing
in both cases. I don't know whether this was intended or just typos. We
should mention it in the report at least.

  4) Section 4.2.1, first sentence: The sentence refers to the "OWL 2 Full
vocabulary". Howerver, in the RDF-Based Semantics spec (Sec. 3.2) it is
called the "OWL 2 RDF-Based Vocabulary". Btw, this term is also upper-cased
in the OWL 2 document, while "vocabulary" is written lower-case in the RIF
document.

Michael

>-----Original Message-----
>From: public-owl-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-owl-wg-request@w3.org]
>On Behalf Of Ian Horrocks
>Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 6:29 PM
>To: OWL 2
>Subject: Re: RIF RDF and OWL Compatibility and OWL Semantics
>
>Dear OWL WG,
>
>Sorry to disturb your well earned repose, but we really should respond
>to RIF's response to our comment about their use of OWL Full Semantics'
>and 'OWL DL Semantics'. Everything now seems OK to me and, unless I hear
>to the contrary, I will respond confirming that we are satisfied.
>
>Regards,
>Ian
>
>
>
>On 10 Dec 2009, at 10:29, Jos de Bruijn wrote:
>
>> Dear Ian,
>>
>> Thank you for bringing this naming issue to our attention.
>> We have updated the naming in the wiki version of the document [1]
>> accordingly.
>>
>> We have also updated the URIs of the import profiles in section 5.1.1
>to
>> those defined by the semantic web coordination group.
>>
>>
>> Best, Jos
>>
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/SWC
>> [2] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/SWC#Conformance_Clauses
>>
>> Ian Horrocks wrote:
>>> Dear RIF WG,
>>>
>>> The current SWC document uses the terms 'OWL Full Semantics' and 'OWL
>DL
>>> Semantics'. However, the OWL Working Group, in the recently published
>>> OWL 2 Recommendation, has tried to clarify these notions by
>separating
>>> syntax and semantics. In OWL 2, it is made clear that OWL 2 DL is a
>>> syntactic restriction and not, per se, a definition of a particular
>>> semantics. For semantics, we refer to the 'OWL 2 Direct Semantics'
>and
>>> 'OWL 2 RDF-Based Semantics', either of which could be applied to an
>OWL
>>> 2 DL ontology.
>>>
>>> We realise that this may come a bit too late in the process (and the
>OWL
>>> WG also acknowledges the issue of accepted terminology, see the
>thread
>>> at[1]). However, we wonder whether the RIF WG would still consider
>>> updating the RDF and OWL Compatibility document to reflect the
>>> terminology used in OWL 2 -- we believe that there would be a benefit
>to
>>> RIF in terms of increased clarity and consistency with the latest
>>> version of OWL.
>>>
>>> Note that the current discussion on the Semantic Web Coordination
>>> Group[2] that will provide generic URI-s for entailment regimes (and
>>> which may be an alternative to the URI-s listed in 5.1.1. of the
>>> document) will probably reflect the updated terminology.
>>>
>>> Sincerely
>>>
>>> On behalf of the OWL Working Group
>>>
>>> Ian Horrocks, Chair
>>>
>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview/
>>> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-semweb-
>cg/2009Oct/0051.html
>>>
>>>
>

--
Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider
Research Scientist, Information Process Engineering (IPE)
Tel  : +49-721-9654-726
Fax  : +49-721-9654-727
Email: michael.schneider@fzi.de
WWW  : http://www.fzi.de/michael.schneider
=======================================================================
FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe
Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe
Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959
Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts, Az 14-0563.1, RP Karlsruhe
Vorstand: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Rüdiger Dillmann, Dipl. Wi.-Ing. Michael Flor,
Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Wolffried Stucky, Prof. Dr. Rudi Studer
Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus
=======================================================================
Received on Sunday, 7 March 2010 15:32:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 7 March 2010 15:32:28 GMT