W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > January 2016

RE: S36 implementation details

From: <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 00:03:01 +0000
To: <L.Svensson@dnb.de>, <sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk>, <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
CC: <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Message-ID: <2A7346E8D9F62D4CA8D78387173A054A603496D3@exmbx04-cdc.nexus.csiro.au>
Since many people are using SKOS in the context of OWL ontologies, and everyone is now using OWL2 and therefore routinely hitting issues with OWLAPI, I suspect that it would be mutually beneficial, and in fact would support the intention that SKOS is the on-ramp for the semantic web. 


-----Original Message-----
From: Svensson, Lars [mailto:L.Svensson@dnb.de] 
Sent: Saturday, 16 January 2016 4:37 AM
To: Sean Bechhofer <sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk>; Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Cc: public-esw-thes@w3.org
Subject: RE: S36 implementation details

On Friday, January 15, 2016 5:37 PM, Sean Bechhofer wrote:
> On 15 Jan 2016, at 15:42, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl> wrote:
> > That's exact.
> If you look at the source [1] you will see that S36, along with a 
> number of other conditions are simply represented using comments. Note 
> that there is also a "prune" of the SKOS vocab [2] which has further 
> axioms removed in order to provide an ontology that fits within the 
> OWL1 DL sublanguage and can then be used by applications that wanted 
> to live within OWL DL. As Antoine points out, this was all in the context of OWL 1.

Do you think it would be possible (and worth the effort) to make it OWL 2-compatible?


Received on Monday, 18 January 2016 00:03:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:46:48 UTC