- From: Marko Luther <luther@docomolab-euro.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 17:21:52 +0200
- To: public-owl-comments@w3.org
- Cc: sandro@w3.org, Thorsten Liebig <thorsten.liebig@uni-ulm.de>, Olaf Noppens <olaf.noppens@uni-ulm.de>
- Message-Id: <360C59C3-7536-49A5-A865-3092422E49C2@docomolab-euro.com>
Hello, we would be happy if OWLlink could be listed under the category APIs at <http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Implementations>. OWLlink (<http://www.owllink.org/) is an implementation-neutral protocol for communication between OWL 2 components. It specifies how to manage reasoning engines and their knowledge bases, how to assert axioms, and how to query inference results. OWLlink is extensible and allows to add required functionality to the protocol on demand. We are currently in the process of revising the OWLlink specification as of October 2008 (based on the OWL 2 Specification of April 11th 2008) and plan to release an update this October, which will be fully aligned with the final OWL 2 Specification. Regards, The OWLlink team --- 1. Authors (in alphabetical order) Thorsten Liebig, Ulm University Marko Luther, DOCOMO Euro-Labs, Munich Olaf Noppens, Ulm University 2. The name of your system, a URL for its website (if any), and a one-sentence description. Name: OWLlink Link: http://www.owllink.org The OWLlink is an extensible protocol defined on top of OWL 2 for the communication among OWL 2 aware systems intended to replace the outdated DIG protocol. 3. Which profile(s) it implements (DL, EL, QL, RL, or Full). We would appreciate some brief commentary about why you chose those profiles, and what sort of implementation techniques you are using. Covers all of OWL 2. 4. Which semantics you implement (direct or rdf-based), and (optionally) why. Supports all OWL 2 semantics. 5. Do you believe your system currently conforms to the OWL 2 Candidate Recommendation? Does it pass all the test cases for your profile? If not, which features does it lack and/or which test cases does it not yet pass? Do you have plans to make it conformant, and make it pass all the test cases? Does not apply here. However, OWLlink was carefully designed to fully conform with the latest OWL 2 specification. 6. Did you implement the "at risk" features, owl:rational and rdf:XMLLiteral? If not, do you intend to, or do you think we should remove them from OWL 2? Does not apply. 7. Finally, we'd appreciate your evaluation of whether the OWL 2 Candidate Recommendation is ready to proceed along the standards track toward being a W3C Recommendation. If not, please be sure to tell us what problems you think we need to address. We believe OWL2 is ready to proceed to Recommendation. -- Dr. Marko Luther Phone: +49-89-56824-204 mailto:luther@docomolab-euro.com Fax: +49-89-56824-301 <http://www.docomolab-euro.com> Mobile: +49 172-855 7763 DoCoMo Communications Laboratories Europe GmbH Landsberger Strasse 312, 80687 Munich, Germany Geschäftsführer: Dr. Masami Yabusaki, Dr. Narumi Umeda, Kazushige Yoshida Amtsgericht München, HRB 132967
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Thursday, 17 September 2009 18:58:06 UTC