Re: [ontolog-forum] Last call documents for OWL 2 specificationavailable - review and comments solicited

Tuesday, December 16, 2008 11:14 AM, Alan wrote:
"I am looking for comments on all aspects of the specification, and in 
particular comments as to how understandable the specification is, any 
comments on new features, as well as any inconsistencies or errors."

Just some short comments to some key OWL2 claims:
1. Partiality. The data type model, the logical basis of OWL 2, seemingly 
pasted from Motik's paper, is too partial and too formal and too logical, no 
real semantic functions and corresponding rules, See Reality, Universal 
Ontology...;
2. Misplacement of categories, the logical entities for the ontological 
entities. See Ontopaedia."OWL 2 allows for annotations of ontologies, 
ontology entities (classes, properties, and individuals), anonymous 
individuals, axioms, and other annotations. Annotations of all these types, 
however, have no semantic meaning in OWL 2 and are ignored in this document 
(Direct Semantics). http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-owl2-semantics-20081008/
3. Inconsistency. "OWL 2 ontologies consist of the following three different 
syntactic categories: entities (classes, properties, individuals), class 
expressions, axioms. http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-owl2-syntax-20081008/

I haven't read all the sequel but have an impression that OWL 0 was tended 
to be more consistent and comprehensive and less formal logical. It is good 
to remember that the SW is a web of data about the world, and that the SW's 
ontological language is designed to describe how the data relates to the 
real world entities, http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/.

With sincere intentions to better your project,
Azamat Abdoullaev
EIS Encyclopedic Intelligent System LTD
http://www.eis.com.cy

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Alan Ruttenberg" <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
To: "[[ontolog-forum]]" <ontolog-forum@ontolog.cim3.net>
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2008 11:14 AM
Subject: [ontolog-forum] Last call documents for OWL 2 
specificationavailable - review and comments solicited


> Dear colleagues,
>
> An you may know, I  co-chair the working group that is specifying the
> next version of the OWL language. Because a number of  you have had
> experience with working with (or wrestling with) OWL, I wonder if you
> would consider reviewing our "last call" documents.
>
> http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2008/10/10/seven_owl_2_drafts_published
>
> I am looking for comments on all aspects of the specification, and in
> particular comments as to how understandable the specification is,
> any comments on new features, as well as any inconsistencies or errors.
>
> Please send your comments to public-owl-comments@w3.org by January
> 23, 2009.
>
> If you have any questions about this process, feel free to contact me
> personally.
>
> Thanks in advance for any efforts you put in to this, which I greatly
> appreciate.
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@ontolog.cim3.net
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@ontolog.cim3.net
>

Received on Wednesday, 17 December 2008 16:33:23 UTC