Re: OWL 2.0 ...

Hi Jim,

just to confirm the obvious, the Protege-OWL system and the related 
CO-ODE modules will support qualified cardinality restrictions in the 
foreseeable future.  We will most likely use a property called 
owl:valuesFrom for that purpose, anticipating this as the likely 
solution in a future version of the OWL standard.

We will also look into supporting owl:allDisjoint ahead of time.

Is there already a timeline for a new OWL version?

Thanks for any info
Holger


Jim Hendler wrote:
> 
>  (NOTE: This is a private message, it has no link to the Sem Web 
> activity, or anything else -- I write this wearing my professor hat!)
> 
> In recent days I've been attending a lot of meetings where I have been 
> approached by people talking about not just the limitations of the 
> current OWL (something I've been hearing about for a long time :-)) but 
> actually talking about proposed technical solutions.   I think it would 
> be good to start to collect some of these and to think a bit about those 
> things that we might want to see go into some future OWL version
>   There's a wide variety of these things going from simple extensions to 
> OWL (such as adding qualified restrictions, having an owl:allDisjoint , 
> etc.)  to adding some standard ways of doing common things in other KR 
> langauges  (part-whole, bounded transitivity, probability models)  or 
> going beyond to new concepts in Sem Web (new models of partial import, 
> named ontology segments, etc.)
>   I'd like to hear what people are working on, or what people need - 
> this way we'll have these ideas on record for the eventual next 
> generation of OWL technology.
>   -Jim H,.
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Friday, 8 April 2005 03:34:56 UTC