- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu>
- Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 13:58:27 -0400
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
Actually, best I can tell (I'm not an insider on Twine, or paid anything at this point) most of the Startups are using some OWL constructs on top of RDF(S) - basically the OWL property assertions (same, different, functional, inverseFunctional, transitive, inverse) and not much else. I think if we end up naming that fragment then they will be happy to say that is what they are using -JH p.s. At the moment this is also pretty close to what Oracle provides in its OWL support. On Oct 29, 2007, at 10:53 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > > From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu> > Subject: OWL DL and OWL Full (was Re: comments on RDF mapping) > Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 10:16:11 -0400 > >> I think Jeremy's comments raise an important issue that is sometimes >> a bit confused in this WG list so far -- there's a tendency to use >> "OWL" to mean "OWL DL" on the part of some people and to mean "OWL >> FULL" (which is essentially the OWL vocabulary used w/o worrying >> about the DL restrictions). There are two important constituencies >> who use the term differently - the more formal set which is well- >> represented on the WG, and the people putting OWL to work in the sort >> of broad applications like Twine, who are primarily using a little >> OWL on big RDF graphs. These may well grow together over time, but >> at the moment I think it is very important that we be clear when we >> work that both of these are important - and make sure when people say >> things like "OWL 1.0 didn't allow" to realize that OWL 1.0 allowed a >> lot of things in Full and less in DL. The WG was unable to come to >> a consensus that "OWL" should mean one of these or the other, and >> thus we were careful to include the modifiers in both cases. We need >> to be very sure as we work on "OWL 1.1" that we are taking the same >> care or we risk alienating one or the other of (at least) two >> important user communities. >> -JH > > Is there any technical information available about Twine? I can't > find > out much information about it on the web site (http://www.twine.com/) > except that it just went into private beta (whatever that is), that it > is a product of Radar Networks (http://www.radarnetworks.com/), that > there are some patented web-related techniques incorporated in it, > that > there are lots of press release on it, and that you are the first > advisor to Radar Networks. > > peter > > PS: I note that some of the press about Twine mentions OWL, without > any > modifier. Perhaps you should address your words to the Twine > people as well. > "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, 29 October 2007 17:58:56 UTC