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

Re: a proposal for defining OWL DL documents (was Re: OWL, XML-RDF and Imports)

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 20:56:31 -0600
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org, Sean Bechhofer <seanb@cs.man.ac.uk>
Message-id: <1045450590.26053.24.camel@dirk.dm93.org>

On Sun, 2003-02-16 at 08:54, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> Continuing along with Sean's reasoning, I propose that the definition of
> an OWL DL document, i.e., an RDF/XML document that is an OWL DL ontology,
> be modified to be:
> DEFINITION:  An RDF/XML document is an OWL DL ontology if 


Could you give some examples to show the difference between
this proposal and the spec as written? Perhaps take
the imports test cases and say how it impacts them?


Hmm... is this a request to re-open issue 5.6?

Let's see... we closed it 14Nov... the pointer seems to go to 7Nov,
though... Mike, pls change that to
if I don't get to it first...
Ah yes, we adopted Heflin's proposal of 1Nov

Yes, this proposal seems to be substantively different from
that decision; i.e. this is a request to re-open the issue.

Very well; I think I have even more evidence now that we shouldn't
standardize owl:imports in this version. I'd be happy to see
it reopened.

> 1/ the RDF graph resulting from parsing it as an RDF/XML document forms the
>    translation of a single OWL ontology in the abstract syntax;
> 2/ all RDF/XML documents that it imports are also in OWL DL ontology form;
>    and
> 3/ the imports closure of the document 
>    a/ does not use any URI reference as more than one of an ontology name,
>       a classID, a datatypeID, an individualID, a datavaluedPropertyID, an
>       individualvaluedPropertyID, or an annotationPropertyID; and
>    b/ does not use any of the URI references from the RDF, RDFS, or OWL
>       namespaces that are mentioned in the RDF or OWL semantics except for
>       the OWL datatypes, the OWL built-in classes, and the OWL built-in
>       annotation properties.
> Imports closure is defined as finding all the directly and indirectly
> imported documents and then forming the merge of their RDF graphs along
> with the RDF graph of the document itself.
> The definition for Lite is similar.
> This would go along with a version of the translation rules that required
> rdf:type triples for classes, datatypes, datatype properties, object
> properties, and annotation properties, but not for ontologies or
> individuals.
> Peter F. Patel-Schneider
> Bell Labs Research
> Lucent Technologies
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Sunday, 16 February 2003 21:56:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:56:51 UTC