W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webont-comments@w3.org > April 2003

Re: OWL Questions! (RDFS/OWL relationship)

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 02 Apr 2003 13:02:15 -0600
To: Davide Noaro <noarodavide@libero.it>, Massimo Marchiori <massimo@w3.org>
Cc: public-webont-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <1049310134.23307.234.camel@dirk.dm93.org>

On Wed, 2003-04-02 at 11:07, Davide Noaro wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm an italian student of computer science and I'm interesting in Web
> Ontology Language. 
> I read documents about it, but i didn't understand well how OWL works
> and the relation with RDFS.... here some questions
> 1) OWL is an extension of RDFS? That is, OWL has much expressive power
> than RDFS ( i can express thing that with RDFS i coudn't ) or it's
> equal but it can express relation and properties more easily? 

The overview covers this question...

"OWL has more facilities for expressing meaning and semantics than XML,
RDF, and RDF-S, and thus OWL goes beyond these languages in its ability
to represent machine readable content on the Web."

  -- 1. Introduction
  OWL Web Ontology Language 
  W3C Working Draft 31 March 2003

and the reference covers it in a it more detail...

"OWL is a vocabulary extension of RDF."
  -- 1.4 OWL and RDF semantics
  OWL Web Ontology Language 
  W3C Working Draft 31 March 2003

The exact nature of the relationship is covered in
excruciating detail in the semantics document,
and there are a number of relevant test cases.

But I suspect the two sections above are most responsive
to your question. Do they answer your question well enough?

> 2)There are some pratical example of the use and usefulness of OWL? (
> Not test cases of W3C or Wine ontology)
>    I think to a tool that can do something usefull with an
> ontology.... 

Tools are emerging. We're starting to collect tools
and implementation experience...

Strictly speaking, this question isn't in scope of the specification;
you're welcome to ask in www-rdf-logic@w3.org , a forum
where many of the tool developers participate.

> I think that without some very pratical example people cound't
> understand well how ontology work and why develop them. Thanks for any
> answer... and sorry for my english! ;-)

On the contrary, thank you very much for translating your
question to English. It is W3C's policy[1] to conduct official
business in English, but we see this as a necessary evil,
not an optimal situation. We do what we can[2] to facilitate
participation in other languages.

In particular, I believe we have a certain amount of
resource available to work with OWL feedback in Italian,
right Massimo?

[1]  5.1 General Information about Technical Reports

[2] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Translation/

> Davide.
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> Davide Noaro 
> noarodavide@libero.it
> ------------------------------------------------------------ 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 2 April 2003 14:02:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:09:28 UTC