W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-comments@w3.org > March 2009

[LC response] To Jonathan Rees

From: Boris Motik <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 20:08:34 -0000
To: <jar@creativecommons.org>
Cc: <public-owl-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <F57A551C77154BD5B2F9BA425F403FE7@wolf>
Dear Jonathan,

Thank you for your comment
on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts.

We indeed wanted to say that entities are one of the three syntactic categories,
and not IRIs. To understand why this is so, consider, for example, the
ObjectHasValue class expression defined in Section 8.2.3 and the accompanying
UML diagram shown in Figure 8. The UML association "individual" of the UML class
"ObjectHasValue" does not point to the UML class "IRI"; instead, it points to
the UML class "Individual". As shown in Figure 2, the UML class "Individual" is
a UML subclass of the UML class "Entity". Finally, note that the UML class
"Entity" in Figure 2 has the UML association "entityIRI" to the UML class "IRI".
Thus, the Syntax document defines OWL 2 ontologies as consisting of "entities
identified by IRIs", rather than "IRIs that identify entities". This view is
reflected in the document's introduction, as well as all the other documents.

We agree with your comment about "can be thought of as primitive terms", and
have changed the text slightly.

Please note that we did not want to concern the Syntax document with the model
theory at all: the Syntax document deals only with the syntactic aspect of OWL
2. The word "model" was never meant to be understood in the model-theoretic
sense in the introduction; rather, it was meant to be understood in the informal
sense as "represent(atation)". In order to prevent misunderstandings, we have
replaced all the occurrences in the document of the former with the latter one.

We have also replaced "formal conceptualization" with "formal specification". We
would prefer not to use "conceptual model" because it contains the word "model",
which seems to be susceptible to misinterpretation.

The following URI can be used to inspect the changes introduced in the Syntax
document in order to address your comments:


Please acknowledge receipt of this email to <mailto:public-owl-comments@w3.org>
(replying to this email should suffice). In your acknowledgment please let us
know whether or not you are satisfied with the working group's response to your

Boris Motik
on behalf of the W3C OWL Working Group
Received on Wednesday, 18 March 2009 20:09:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:40:21 UTC