- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu>
- Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 10:34:07 -0500
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
- Message-Id: <2725A329-F2C9-41FB-B650-F25F525EB04A@cs.rpi.edu>
I'm willing to believe you - but an earlier slide stack (which I cannot share since I got it under NDA) had some different info, and I have been unable to get my hands on the OWL 11g documentation, which would, of course, be the best place to find the answer. But I stick to my main point, which is that it doesn't matter On Nov 26, 2007, at 9:55 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > Gee, now I'm really confused. > > > I would have thought that the talk document > > http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/DatabaseAndOntology/ > 2007-10-18_AlanWu/RDBMS-RDFS-OWL-InferenceEngine--AlanWu_20071018.pdf > A Scalable RDBMS-Based Inference Engine for RDFS/OWL > Oracle New England Development Center > alan.wu@oracle.com > > was more than some person "looking at some of the different things > Oracle has proposed". > > I was using this document instead of the Oracle white paper > > http://www.oracle.com/technology/tech/semantic_technologies/pdf/ > semantic11g_dataint_twp.pdf > > as it has more information. > > Although the document doesn't have too much in the way of details, > I was > taking it as more-or-less official, particularly as it has been linked > to from the WG's Wiki for some time now, and the Oracle rep (who > appears > to be the author of the document) hasn't complained. > > peter > > > From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu> > Subject: Re: RDFS 3.0 and Oracle OWL Prime (was Re: wiki page on > fragments extended) > Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 09:31:33 -0500 > >> Peter- As best I can tell, Oracle has not released a formal >> definition of the 11g support on their site, the sites that you are >> looking at are from people looking at some of the different things >> Oracle has proposed - the set I used is from their first announcement >> and a presentation at the SemTech conference, which was back in >> March. If they've decided to cover more of OWL, that's great! >> Anyway, I wasn't, in your words, justifying it by claims that its >> constructs correspond to Oracle, just pointing out the resemblance to >> the early Oracle definition. I think the language stands on the >> other properties, which i outlined >> We have an Oracle rep on this committee, maybe Zhe Wu knows the >> details >> -JH >> >> On Nov 26, 2007, at 8:21 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >> >>> From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu> >>> Subject: Re: wiki page on fragments extended >>> Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 12:48:34 -0500 >>> >>>> Uli - I should have included the URI - it's http://www.w3.org/2007/ >>>> OWL/wiki/Fragments - not connected to the Tractable Fragments >>>> document since I didn't think it belonged there at this point >>>> -JH >>> >>> This page claims that the constructs in the RDFS 3.0 proposal are >>> "almost identical to those included in Oracle's OWL Prime", but the >>> most >>> complete information I can find >>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/DatabaseAndOntology/ >>> 2007-10-18_AlanWu/RDBMS-RDFS-OWL-InferenceEngine-- >>> AlanWu_20071018.pdf >>> indicates that OWL Prime includes hasValue, allValuesFrom, >>> someValuesFrom, and complementOf which are not in the RDFS 3.0 >>> proposal. >>> The addition of these constructs makes OWL Prime very different >>> from the >>> proposed RDFS 3.0. >>> >>> The other OWL subsets supported by Oracle also appear to be quite >>> different from the proposed RDFS 3.0. OWLSIF appears to include >>> hasValue, allValuesFrom, and someValuesFrom (as they are in pD*). >>> RDFS++ appears to only add sameAs and InverseFunctionalProperty to >>> RDFS. >>> >>> So, although RDFS 3.0 may indeed be a reasonable fragment, I do not >>> think that it can be justified by claims that its constructs are >>> similar >>> to what Oracle supports. >>> >>> >>> Peter F. Patel-Schneider >>> Bell Labs Research >> >> "If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would >> it?." - Albert Einstein >> >> Prof James Hendler http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~hendler >> Tetherless World Constellation Chair >> Computer Science Dept >> Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY 12180 >> >> >> >> "If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would it?." - Albert Einstein Prof James Hendler http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~hendler Tetherless World Constellation Chair Computer Science Dept Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY 12180
Received on Monday, 26 November 2007 15:45:45 UTC