- 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outdated DIG protocol.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