- 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