W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > June 2008

[RDF/OWL] status RDF/OWL document

From: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2008 18:27:35 +0200
Message-ID: <48441F77.6070104@inf.unibz.it>
To: RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>

Dear all,

I updated the RDF and OWL compatibility document [1] according to our 
discussion at the face-to-face, the reviewer comments, and a few small 
things I found.  I did not yet finished the proofs of the theorems.

But, in any case, people (particularly Christian) can review the current 
version.
You may notice that I included a couple of new editor's notes.  These 
notes mark dependencies with the DLP and DTB documents, wherever I 
anticipated a possible change in those documents before the RDF/OWL 
document will go to last call. Before publication, these notes will have 
to be revisited to make sure the dependencies are not broken.

This is a rough list of the changes compared with the version discussed 
in the face-to-face:

1 the reference to SWRL was added to the introduction
2 reference to the shortcut syntax in the introduction
3 a new section 2, which describes the difference between RIF and RDF 
symbols, was added
4 OWL DL compatibility: the first example in section 4 was removed 
because it was nonsensical; the RIF rule set was inconsistent
5 the table of RIF-RDF symbol correspondence was moved from the 
introduction of RDF compatibility to the new section 2
6 the description of the organization of the documents near the end of 
the overview was improved
7 a note in section 4.1.1 about DL-safeness being "at-risk" was added
8 for the reference to OWL 2 I used the text suggested by the OWL 
working group
9 the embedding of D-entailment was removed
10 the notation for RIF rule sets in examples and definitions was 
corrected (there were several errors in quantifications with commas and 
parentheses)
11 DEFINITION => Definition (to make more coherent with BLD and FLD 
documents)
12 the section on required built-ins in the appendix was removed and the 
embeddings have been updated to use the built-ins defined in the DTD 
document
13 a formal definition of OWL DLP has been added in section 7.2.1
14 the concept of "considered datatypes" is now used, with a reference 
to the conformance clause section in BLD, in the definition of 
conforming datatype maps (section 3.1.2) as well as the embeddings of 
RDFS and OWL DL entailment (sections 7.1.5 and 7.2.3.2)

Best, Jos

[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/SWC

-- 
Jos de Bruijn            debruijn@inf.unibz.it
+390471016224         http://www.debruijn.net/
----------------------------------------------
An expert is a person who has made all the
mistakes that can be made in a very narrow
field.
   - Niels Bohr
Received on Monday, 2 June 2008 16:27:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:33:49 GMT