- From: Kendall Grant Clark <kendall@clarkparsia.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 10:51:37 -0400
- To: Web Ontology Language \(\(OWL\)\) Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Excerpts from Bijan Parsia's message of Tue Jun 17 10:05:48 -0400 2008: > > Hi folks, > > Now that Easy Keys are in the "bake" stage (i.e., we've reach > consenus (with appropraite reservations) and have spec text in > specs), the next most mature proposal to fill a capability hole is n- > ary data predicates. > > A reminder of use cases: > http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/N-ary_Data_predicate_use_case > > The current draft of a proposal (needs a tart up to match new specs): > http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/N-ary_Data_predicate_use_case > > For at least linear inequations, we have implementation, indeed, > commercial experience in the form of Racer Pro. > > Finally, the only general objector to n-ary per se (HP) has withdrawn > that objection. So I think we're no longer in need of reaching > consensus on the basic facility, but on exactly what we'll spec and > require. FWIW, Evan Wallace (I'm not speaking for him here!) and I are participating in the W3C's Incubator Group on Product Modeling, which is an OWL-related effort. I'm very new to PM, generally, but it's already clear that PM has *tons* of use cases and requirements for a quite robust n-ary data predicate design in OWL2. They define classes like Facade, which is (making this up!) a subclass of BuildingPart that has a height twice as long as its width. They also want to be able to say things like a particular kind of stairway has a width that is some proportion of its enclosing structure -- as I understand things, this is beyond what anyone proposes for OWL2, and I mention it only to give an idea that there are real customer needs here. Again, I don't speak for Evan, but I do encourage him to backfill some of my sloppy tech details here with some actual content. :> Cheers, Kendall Clark
Received on Tuesday, 17 June 2008 14:52:22 UTC