- From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
- Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 21:57:29 +0100
- To: "Evren Sirin" <evren@clarkparsia.com>
- Cc: <public-owl-dev@w3.org>, <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Hi, Evren! Evren Sirin wrote on Sunday, November 04: [snip] >> (1) Stop hunting for metamodelling capabilities in OWL-1.1-DL. >> Metamodelling, even in a restricted form, would really be >> a useful feature, but the community has already learnt >> to live with the current situation. >> > >No, not really. The workarounds for vocabulary separation is ugly and >cumbersome. I will give you one example related to OWL-S >effort [2] but >there are other similar use cases. OWL-S coalition worked hard to keep >OWL-S ontologies in the DL species to make it accessible to OWL-DL >reasoners. This meant to create a shadow list for rdf:List vocabulary >quoting URI's and RDF/XML snippets as literal values, etc. This rather >ugly solution created many problems for developers (e.g. me as the >developer of OWL-S API [3]) and users of OWL-S (see [4] about one >example problema). With the use of punning all these troubles go away. >And the incompleteness regarding sameAs-equivalentClass has no >importance in this setting. Ok, now we come to some core point: The use cases. When I wrote my original mail, the only relevant usecase for "classes as instances" I could imagine was to assign object properties to classes. But there are more, right? What I am still missing is a document which lists and discusses some relevant use cases for punning. Particularly, I am looking for use cases where the missing sameAs-equivalentClass entailment does not hurt. Honestly, I have difficulties to imagine that this is really the case. Nevertheless, the most relevant point is to first have such a use case document. And also I want to have a technical specification of punning, because I have the feeling that there is still no common agreement on what punning provides and what not. [snip] >> I think this alone already suffices, no need to look for more. :) >> > >I disagree. Punning solves the problems in the above use case and the >sameAs-equivalentClass distinction has no impact. There were other >similar use cases discussed at OWLED from different domains where >punning would be sufficient. Sounds interesting. Is there a document where these use cases are documented and discussed? This would possibly be exactly what I am looking for. Cheers, Michael -- Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik Karlsruhe Abtl. Information Process Engineering (IPE) Tel : +49-721-9654-726 Fax : +49-721-9654-727 Email: Michael.Schneider@fzi.de Web : http://www.fzi.de/ipe/eng/mitarbeiter.php?id=555 FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959 Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Az: 14-0563.1 Regierungspräsidium Karlsruhe Vorstand: Rüdiger Dillmann, Michael Flor, Jivka Ovtcharova, Rudi Studer Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus
Received on Monday, 5 November 2007 20:57:43 UTC