RE: SPARQL and the owl web language

Elias,

Will it be relatively easy to exclude the inferenced graphs?

Regards,
Hans 

-----Original Message-----
From: semantic-web-request@w3.org [mailto:semantic-web-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Elias Torres
Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 13:03
To: l14103@alunos.uevora.pt
Cc: Semantic Web; Cláudio Fernandes; public-sparql-dev@w3.org
Subject: Re: SPARQL and the owl web language


Cláudio,

I'm a member of the DAWG currently working on the SPARQL specification and I
just wanted to point you to a couple of our documents to help you answer (or
maybe not) your question:

>From our charter document [1]:

[[[
The protocol will allow access to a notional RDF graph. This may in practice
be the virtual graph which would follow from some form of inference from a
stored graph. This does not affect the data access protocol, but may affect
the description of the data access service. For example, if OWL DL semantics
are supported by a service, that may be evident in the description of the
service or the virtual graph which is queried, but it will not affect the
protocol designed under this charter.

]]]

Note that we did not engage in building a service description specification,
but nonetheless, it's no part of our spec.

There has been a LOT of discussion on the issue by the working group
members, organizations and individual parties. We've labeled the issue
owlDisjunction and as of 01/26/2006 we have decided [2] to postpone the
issue given an agreement on the current wording of the spec.

Regards,

Elias Torres

PS> I've copied the public-sparql-dev@w3.org mailing list to increase
the awareness of the list for SPARQL related questions.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2003/12/swa/dawg-charter#rdfs-owl-queries
[2] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#owlDisjunction

Cláudio Fernandes wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> 
> I've recently bumped with some (naive?) questions about SPARQL and the 
> OWL language:
> 
> We know that SPARQL is a query language for RDF [1], and that the owl 
> language [2] is a vocabulary extension of RDF. Put it that way, is 
> SPARQL "big" enough to query correctly an ontology described by the 
> owl language? If it isn't, what is the "main" query language to do that,
if
> any exist? OWL-QL?    
> 
> The bottom line is: if i want to build a semantic web agent, capable 
> of querying an ontology, should i bet in rdf + SPARQL? or owl + ??
> Will i be betting in the wrong horse if i go through the owl language 
> only and discard the potentialities of SPARQL? Or I'm i really 
> confused and the truth is in rdf/owl + SPARQL? And which are my limits 
> in this case?
> 
> thanks in advance for your time/thoughts,
> 
> [1] - http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-rdf-sparql-query-20060220/
> [2] - http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/
> 

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.2.5/284 - Release Date: 17-Mar-06
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.2.5/284 - Release Date: 17-Mar-06

Received on Saturday, 18 March 2006 17:24:50 UTC