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

HTTP://www.w3.org/mid/487A187C.4070509@w3.org

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.

Ivan

> 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