W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > July 2008

Re: A possible way of going forward with OWL-R unification (ISSUE-131)

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 19:01:15 +0200
Message-ID: <487E295B.1070008@w3.org>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
CC: boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk, public-owl-wg@w3.org

Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> I agree with the proposal made by Boris in
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jul/0250.html 
> This makes OWL-R a syntactic language, i.e., a true profile.  It
> simplifies the situation with profiles considerably and usefully.
> The benefit of OWL-R is that a certain kind of reasoning can be
> accurately performed in OWL-R written as RDF by using the set of rules
> provided as a convenience.  In my opinion, no more need be said.  Anyone
> can decide to implement OWL-R reasoning using this (non-normative) rule
> set, but there could be other ways to implement OWL-R reasoning (for
> example, by using a DL reasoner or even a reasoner for higher-order
> logic).  What counts is the correctness of the implementation.  
> Implementors are also free to use this rule set for other purposes, such
> as on RDF graphs that do not fit within the OWL-R profile, just
> as they would be free to use a higher-order reasoner.   Any
> modifications to the implementation technique required for these
> additional purposes are beyond the scope of our specification.  In fact,
> I would go so far as to not include Boris's proposed addition to Section
> 4.4
> 	The rules from Section 4.3 can be applied to arbitrary RDF
> 	graphs, in which case the produced consequences are sound but
> 	not necessarily complete.

I have already objected to this type of description elsewhere


this type of slightly derogatory description is certainly not what 
vendors would put as part of their product announcement let alone the 
fact that they would not even have a clear name and standard to refer 
to. I regard that as a major problem.


> as being obvious and not useful in our specification.
> peter


Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2008 17:02:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:05 UTC