- From: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 23:14:17 +0000
- To: Web Ontology Language ((OWL)) Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
In an effort to get us thinking and to structure our discussion we came up with the following list of questions/topics (see http:// www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2008.01.30/Discussion). Although we don't expect to make any firm decisions, we do hope to reach agreement on some general directions. Note that as this is a large and as yet relatively little discussed topic we have allowed 45 minutes. This may mean postponing some or all issue related matters to next week. * There are (at least) two aspects to this discussion: Language Fragments, defined in terms of (restrictions on) the (structural) syntax, and Conformance levels, defined in terms of implementation behaviour. o Do we understand and agree with this distinction? * "Rule based" fragments such as OWLPrime. o Review of current status. o What are the language fragment and conformance level issues? * OWL-Lite o Do we want to retain a/the OWL-Lite? o Is there a backwards compatibility issue? o How would it relate to other fragments? * Number of fragments o Should we limit the number of fragments? o If so, why and to how many? o Are some fragments more or less compelling than others (e.g., in terms of implementer experience and utility)? * Documentation o Should a/the tractable fragments document be REC track? o Is the existing tractable fragments document appropriate? o Do we need additional user facing documentation for the fragments? Regards, Ian and Alan
Received on Monday, 28 January 2008 23:14:29 UTC