W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > November 2006

Re: OWL without RDF

From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 15:01:00 -0500
Message-Id: <p0623092bc18273b7bd0c@[10.0.0.233]>
To: William Bug <William.Bug@DrexelMed.edu>, Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
Cc: public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
actually, we're trying to move the discussion to public-owl-dev@w3.org
there's a thread there that expresses some of my concerns about 
moving away from the OWL syntax - given that the primary tools out 
there right now still assume the OWL is integrated with the RDF 
graph...

At 2:52 PM -0500 11/16/06, William Bug wrote:
As I expected, the experts are listening.  :-)

Many thanks, Holger.  That's extremely important to know.

I will dig into the thread for more detail.  One main concern would 
be whether that was just a token gesture to stay compatible for now, 
as opposed to a commitment to remain compatible, until or unless an 
effective alternative is provided to representing very large 
knowledgebases in RDF.

I think more than anything I was a bit overwhelmed by the collective 
picture given by those half-dozen or so presentations from last 
week's meeting.  The meeting seemed "fresh" enough, so that it could 
be expected to be reflective of the status quo.  I assume there was 
much heated discussion during the meeting, that would have filled out 
such detail - or such has been carried out on the owl-dev list.

I suppose it's also a good idea to dig into the OWL Extensions list 
hosted by Jim Hendler's lab:
	<http://lists.mindswap.org/mailman/listinfo/owl>http://lists.mindswap.org/mailman/listinfo/owl

Cheers,
Bill


On Nov 16, 2006, at 2:33 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:


However, I'd point out, in the last document, where they describe a 
mapping of OWL 1.1 to RDF, they make the following caveat:
Not every OWL 1.1 ontology can be serialized in RDF. In particular, 
ontologies using the following features of OWL 1.1 cannot be 
serialized:
    1. punning and
    2. annotations on axioms.


Please see a recent thread on the public-owl-dev mailing list about 
this: 
<http://www.nabble.com/Limitations-of-OWL-1.1-to-RDF-mapping-tf2639224.html>http://www.nabble.com/Limitations-of-OWL-1.1-to-RDF-mapping-tf2639224.html

Bijan states:
"The RDF mapping has lagged behind the others, but the plan is to
extend the mapping to cover these cases."

Holger
TopQuadrant, Inc.
<http://www.topbraidcomposer.com>http://www.topbraidcomposer.com
<http://composing-the-semantic-web.blogspot.com>http://composing-the-semantic-web.blogspot.com/


Bill Bug
Senior Research Analyst/Ontological Engineer

Laboratory for Bioimaging  & Anatomical Informatics
www.neuroterrain.org
Department of Neurobiology & Anatomy
Drexel University College of Medicine
2900 Queen Lane
Philadelphia, PA    19129
215 991 8430 (ph)
610 457 0443 (mobile)
215 843 9367 (fax)


Please Note: I now have a new email - 
<mailto:William.Bug@DrexelMed.edu>William.Bug@DrexelMed.edu


-- 
Prof James Hendler				hendler@cs.umd.edu
Dept of Computer Science			http://www.cs.umd.edu/~hendler
AV Williams Bldg				301-405-2696 (work)
Univ of Maryland				301-405-6707 (Fax)
College Park, MD 20853 USA
Received on Thursday, 16 November 2006 20:02:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:00:45 GMT