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

Re: OWL Lite vs OWL DL-Lite

From: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 09:57:03 +0000
Message-ID: <15946.6767.271683.983637@merlin.horrocks.net>
To: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@openhealth.org>
Cc: "webont" <www-webont-wg@w3.org>, "Jim Hendler" <hendler@cs.umd.edu>, "Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>

On February 11, Jonathan Borden writes:
> 
> Jim Hendler wrote:
> 
> >
> > On yesterday's Semantic Web Coordination Group telecon [1] and in a
> > less formal session following it (same log) there was, yet again,
> > discussion of the issues of how RDF, RDFS and OWL fit together --
> > there is concern that we haven't explained this well in some of our
> > documents, and it may cause problems come LC time.  The problem is
> > that by going with what we once referred to as our "1-dimensional"
> > approach to Lite subset of DL subset of Full, we convey the idea of
> > an upgrade path in which RDFS documents can "easily" be upgraded to
> > Owl Lite.  Problem, of course, is that this is not really true --
> > RDFS is easily upgraded to OWL Full (using the Lite vocabulary
> > subset) and several of our implementors - HP, Protege, various DAML
> > sites, have expressed an interest in supporting what is essentially
> > our un-named sublangauge -- OWL Lite language restrictions with Full
> > Semantics.
> 
> I guess this all depends on what folks want OWL Lite to be. My take is that
> OWL Lite is lite from an editing point of view, and not necessarily much
> lighter than OWL DL from a reasoning point of view -- is that essentially
> correct? 

No it is *NOT* correct. Please see [1].

> If so, we could always do:
> 
> OWL DL as a subset of OWL Full. (easier reasoning)
> 
> OWL Lite as another subset of OWL Full. (easier editing)(this is your OWL
> flite).
> 
> I guess the question is: who has a need for OWL Lite as a subset of OWL DL?

Please see [2].

Regards, Ian

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0239.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0088.html

> 
> Jonathan
Received on Wednesday, 12 February 2003 04:58:00 GMT

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