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

Re: On "Reducing OWL Entailment to Description Logic Satisfiability"

From: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2003 11:45:47 +0000
Message-ID: <16283.46059.143299.60956@merlin.horrocks.net>
To: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: pfps@research.bell-labs.com, public-webont-comments@w3.org

Thanks for the kind words. Anyone interested in reading the paper can
find the full text at [1] (authors' freedom to publish full text on
their web sites is part of the agreement with Springer relating to
their publication of the ISWC proceedings).


[1] http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~horrocks/Publications/download/2003/HoPa03b.pdf

On October 24, Dan Connolly writes:
> I just finished reading this paper* from the ISWC 2003 
> (http://iswc2003.semanticweb.org/) proceedings (p17).
> The presentation of OWL to this audience is well done, with a balanced 
> presentation of OWL Lite, OWL DL, and OWL Full.
> The paper also clearly motivates many of the design choices in OWL DL 
> and OWL Lite in terms of the established research results. I copy 
> public-webont-comments to make this design rationale available* just a 
> few clicks from the W3C specs.
> The paper notes only the implementation motivation for OWL Lite, and not 
> the ease-of-learning motivation. And I (continue to) disagree with the 
> claim that DAML+OIL is "basically a very expressive description logic 
> with RDF syntax", but these are minor points.
> Overall, the paper gives a very good account of the WebOnt Working 
> Group's efforts.
> * the full text of the conference proceedings are, unfortunately, not 
> freely available via http, or I would give a pointer.
> --
> Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Sunday, 26 October 2003 06:50:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:09:29 UTC