W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > February 2003

update to Overview Document - action completed

From: Deborah McGuinness <dlm@ksl.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 21:07:19 -0800
Message-ID: <3E3F4A87.CAF5CAA0@ksl.stanford.edu>
To: webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>

There is a new overview in the normal place -
 http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLOverview.htm
It has the feb 3, 2003 date requested.
I also attach it here for completeness for the records.

Updates:

- Per Hendler's request, remove datatypes for now.  Thus section 3.6 was
dropped (and 3.7 is
now 3.6).
- Per last telecon, added intersection of for named classes only.
(Note, this added a new section in OWL Lite for intersection of named
classes
and required a small clarification to the boolean connector section in
OWL DL/Full section.

it has gone through spell.
Frank had offered to put in a roadmap a few days ago and I had asked him
to do the validation phase.
I have not received a roadmap but
it does include pointers to the other documents with a phrase about why
one would go to any of those documents.
Thus, even if Frank is not on, I would like to publish on schedule.
It is in compliance with hendler's email about what is needed to
publish.

It will need the links at the top fixed to be the appropriate w3c links.

Horan's and Welty's very useful comments addressed as below.

Internal links included from the table to the segment in the document.
I am releasing write lock.

Updates per reviews from horan and welty:


Subject: Review of OWL Overview
 Resent-Date:  Thu, 30 Jan 2003 10:35:49 -0500 (EST)
 Resent-From:  www-webont-wg@w3.org
        Date:  Thu, 30 Jan 2003 12:37:40 +0000
        From:   Bernard Horan <Bernard.Horan@Sun.COM>
 Organization:  Sun Microsystems
          To:  www-webont-wg@w3.org

Deborah, Frank

on the whole I think this document is fine. It states its purpose pretty

clearly and achieves what it sets out to do. I think it needs a little
bit of polishing, as suggested below.

cheers

Bernard

--------------
Comments are based on line numbers of HTML document
http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLOverview.htm

51) [First para of abstract] This first sentence doesn't really make
sense or add much to the paragraph. Suggest dropping it.
*DLM - previously we were asked for such a paragraph and was consensus
at previous f2f.
*DLM - updated according to welty's suggestion below.

60) [2nd para of abstract] Suggest rewording as "This document is
written for readers who require a 'first impression' ..."
*DLM - done

142) [First para of introduction] Same sentence as line 51.
*DLM - comment above  plus chris sent comment

148) "The ontology language in OWL ..." seems a bit clumsy. Suggest "OWL

is more expressive ..."
*DLM - done

149) typo: "language" --> "languages"
*DLM - done

178) Suggest change "In order for machines..." to "For machines"
*DLM - slight modification and done

181) "The OWL Requirements Document discusses more in detail "What is an

ontology", motivates the need for a Web Ontology Language in terms of
six use cases", formulates design goals, requirements and objectives for

OWL." This sentence seems out of place, or is perhaps a placeholder?
Perhaps a longer sentence connecting the requirements doc to "Why OWL?"
*DLM - modified

205) Too many <br>'s
*DLM - not showing in my version

207) "these datamodels" -- where did the plural come from?

227) [First para of 'The 3 sublanguages...'] Suggest "The OWL language"
--> "OWL" as former seems a tautology.
*DLM - done

250) Suggest change: "for example, while a class may be a subclass of
many classes, a class cannot be a member of another class" --> "for
example, a class may be a subclass of many classes, but cannot be an
instance of another class"
*DLM - done

288) Introduction of term "species", instead of sublanguage
*DLM - taking species out everywhere

297) "predictable" -- not sure what this means. Either "you're less
likely to get the right answer", or "you're less likely to find tools".
*DLM - covered both by saying since complete implementations of OWL Full
do not currently exist.

304) mismatch between singular and plural.
*DLM - fixed

326) typo: 'subProperty' --> 'subPropertyOf'
*DLM - fixed

331) Suggest addition of prepositions --> "Synopsis of OWL Lite" [This
may be a British vs. US English idiom; we seem to favour prepositions
more :-]
*DLM - did not take this since then table of contents would have a
number of listings
Synopsis of xx instead of xx synopsis.  thus the words with content come
first.

401) Similarly --> "Synopsis of OWL DL and OWL Full"
*DLM - see above comment

454) What's the significance of "in English"? Should other readers look
elsewhere? Suggest dropping it.
*DLM - done

488) drop "when" as OWL says nothing about the temporal relationship
between a class and its instances.
*DLM - done

498) Suggest changing "classes are subclasses of other classes" --> "a
class is a subclass of one or more other classes"
*DLM - done

504) typo: "relationshop"
*DLM - done

511) typo: "Datatypeproperty"
*DLM - done

514) Suggest changing "some properties are subproperties of other
properties" --> "a property is a subproperty of one ore more other
properties"
*DLM - rewording done

525) typo: "Mamal"
*DLM - done

526) typo: "restrictions" --> "restriction"
*DLM - done

533) typo: "p" --> "P"
*DLM - done

552) Suggest changing " stated to be the same" --> "stated to be equal"
*DLM - used identical

559) ditto
*DLM - ditto above

564) I'm not sure it's necessary to include the sentence that begins "A
reasoner can also deduce".
*DLM - it is a different deduction so i left this

568) Isn't this 'identity' instead of 'equality'? If the two individuals

  are the same, then they're identical, rather than equal (i.e. they
refer to the same instance).
*DLM - used "this construct" for simplicity.

573) Suggest changing 'systems' to 'languages' in "can be important in
systems such as OWL"
*DLM - slight rewording done

573) Suggest changing "when modelers are interested in making the unique

names assumption within those sets of objects." --> "when modelers are
interested in enforcing unique names within those sets of objects"
*DLM - done

599) I don't understand this para.
*DLM - i am not sure if this was the side condition paragraph.  I
reworded
it since it used old terminology of atmost 1 restrictions.

625) Extraneous '>'
*Dlm - done

643) ditto
*DLM - done

651) "OWL Lite Property Type Restriction". I don't understand your use
of the term 'type' in this section. The examples are about the use of
restrictions to the class of instances. Is that the same as 'type'? (In
OOPLs, it's not). Plus the title is a bit of a mouthful! There's also
several "individual instance" phrases in which the word "individual"
seems superfluous.
*DLM - it was agreed at the stanford f2f to pull out the property type
restrictions
from the other property constructors.  other naming phrases are welcome.

I took out many ofthe individual instance but it was there to make sure
no one thought
that we were talking about meta classes.

698) Suggest changing "OWL Lite Restricted Cardinality" --> "Restricted
Cardinality in OWL Lite", otherwise it sounds a bit like you're
discussing another variant of OWL Lite.
*DLM - cant take this suggestion without doing it for the entire
document -
many sections have OWL Lite xx

704) Suggest changing "the restrictions limit the cardinality" --> "the
restrictions constrain the cardinality", to avoid overuse of 'limit'.
*DLM - done

717) typo: "person" --> "persons"
*DLM - done

743) Extraneous pseudo-sentence: "Th individuals by the property
hasSpouse."
*DLM - done

758) [Alternate namings for these restricted...] Not sure what this para

is doing.
*DLM - this paragraph was requested at the bristol f2f since we did not
agree to do what our public comments asked for - ie. we did not rename
the
limited cardinality constructors.
the decision was that this document would point to the email welty sent
to the group.


767) "will be" --> "are" ??
*DLM - not sure where this is - your numbering is different than mine

792) Confused by "DatatypeProperties are relations between instances of
classes and RDF literals and XML Schema datatypes" -- is that a triple
relationship?

794) Is "ObjectProperties are relations between instances of two
classes" correct? What about relations between instances of the same
class?
*Dlm - then they are still relations between instances of classes (just
the same class)

818) "Full OWL" --> "OWL Full"
*DLM - done

820) suggest removing "in OWL"
*DLM - done

837) "Full OWL" --> "OWL Full"
*DLM - done

844) Ditto
*DLM - done

848) "empty class" seems a bit odd. Perhaps change to "a class that has
no instances", or "a class that can have no instances"?
*DLM - done

849) "Full OWL" --> "OWL Full"
*DLM - done

853) Suggest remove "English"
*DLM - done


================
from welty
Subject: Review of Overview (Overeview?): part 1 of 2
Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 17:23:04 -0500 (EST)
Resent-From: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 17:22:26 -0500
From: Christopher Welty <welty@us.ibm.com>
To: www-webont-wg@w3.org

Conclusion:

The content of the document is basically ready to go.  Good work, it is
short and concise and, i believe, achieves its stated goal.  The
document
is not ready for publication, however, as a lot of links are missing and

there are still indications of work to be done.

Corrections & Suggestions:

In abstract, change:
"OWL facilitates greater machine readability of web content than that
supported by XML, RDF, and RDF Schema by providing additional
vocabulary."
->
"OWL facilitates greater machine readability of web content than that
supported by XML, RDF, and RDF Schema by providing additional vocabulary

along with a formal semantics."

*DLM - done

In 1.0, change:
"OWL is intended to be used by applications that need to process the
content of information, instead of presenting just human-readable
content.
OWL can be used to explicitly represent term vocabularies and the
relationships between entities in these vocabularies. This
representation
of terms and their interrelationships creates an ontology. The ontology
language in OWL is more expressive than that in XML, RDF, and RDF-S, and

thus OWL goes beyond these language in its ability to represent machine
readable content on the web." ->
"OWL is intended to be used by applications that need to process the
document content, as opposed to presenting the content to humans. OWL
can
be used to explicitly represent the meaning of terms in vocabularies and

the relationships between those terms. This representation of terms and
their interrelationships is considered an ontology. OWL has more
facilities for expressing meaning and semantics than XML, RDF, and
RDF-S,
and thus OWL goes beyond these language in its ability to represent
machine readable content on the web."

*DLM - done

"A glossary of the terminology used in this and the other documents can
be
found in the OWL Guide." ->
The URL for the glossary is #OWLGlossary
*DLM - done

Section 1.2 is simply awesome.

In section 2.0:
"In this document, italicized terms are terms in OWL. Prefixes of rdf:
or
rdfs: are used when terms are already present in RDF or RDF Schema.
Otherwise terms are introduced by OWL. Thus, the term Class is more
precisely stated as owl:Class and rdfs:subPropertyOf indicates that
subProperty is already in the rdfs vocabulary (technically: the rdfs
namespace). " ->
This is poorly stated. Explain what you mean with owl:class a little
better.

*DLM - small addition

2.1&2.2: The table is very nice. As noted in the text, all the links
have
to be filled in.

-Chris

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: +1 914.784.6912, Email: welty@us.ibm.com

--
 Deborah L. McGuinness
 Knowledge Systems Laboratory
 Gates Computer Science Building, 2A Room 241
 Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-9020
 email: dlm@ksl.stanford.edu
 URL: http://ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/index.html
 (voice) 650 723 9770    (stanford fax) 650 725 5850   (computer fax)
801 705 0941


Received on Tuesday, 4 February 2003 00:04:26 GMT

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