W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > October 2002

concerning lite, fast, large versions of OWL

From: Christopher Welty <welty@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 21:02:45 -0400
To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFDA6A2F7F.17F85396-ON85256C55.0004998F@pok.ibm.com>

Although I am strongly in favor of having "classes as instances" in some 
version of OWL, I am also very strongly in favor of as simple as possible 
a view of our language.

Although consensus regarding the layering was a major accomplishment, it 
leaves us now with three versions of OWL: fast and large based on the RDF 
syntax/semantics, and of course the orthogonal "lite" version of the 
language.

Having three versions of the language opens us up to some pretty obvious 
criticisms, in my view.  I think this would be even worse if OWL Lite, 
which is supposed to be a simplified version of OWL, is not a subset of 
Fast OWL, since Fast OWL is a subset of Large OWL.

I was passionately ambivalent about OWL Lite in general, but I would 
strongly object to it as yet another subset of Large OWL.  Several people 
have expressed opinions that "classes as instances" should be in OWL Lite. 
 I'm not sure why - if it is allowed in Large OWL, then what difference 
does it make if it is in OWL Lite?

-ChrisW

Dr. Christopher A. Welty, Knowledge Structures Group
IBM Watson Research Center, 19 Skyline Dr.
Hawthorne, NY  10532     USA 
Voice: +1 914.784.7055,  IBM T/L: 863.7055
Fax: +1 914.784.6078, Email: welty@us.ibm.com
Received on Wednesday, 16 October 2002 21:03:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:53 GMT