- From: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 06:46:34 +0100
- To: W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
I believe that what we were referring to in our discussion last week, and what Holger is asking for [1], is what in OWL 1 was called the "RDF Schema of OWL" [2]. As is explained in Section 1.7 [3]: "This schema provides information about the OWL vocabulary that could be a useful reference point for ontology builders and tool developers. The restrictions provided by the schema on the OWL classes and properties are informative and not complete. Also, this schema does not make distinctions between OWL Full, OWL DL and OWL Lite." The idea is to use RDFS to describe the structure of OWL syntax -- i.e., it aims to be a kind of "meta-schema". For example, it specifies the range and domain of the properties used in the OWL syntax. Unfortunately, RDFS isn't even close to being capable of describing the structure completely, so the schema is highly incomplete, and so of limited utility. However, I don't immediately see the harm in updating it slightly for OWL 2 given that we have had more than one request. I believe that this is what was proposed by several people during the teleconf. Presumably we would arrange for this updated version to be served from [4]? Note that this shouldn't be confused with Michael's suggestion to augment the RDF-based semantics with a set of axiomatic triples (which is, IMHO, a reasonable but completely unrelated proposal). Regards, Ian [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/2009Jul/ 0007.html [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#appB [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#AppendixList [4] http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
Received on Tuesday, 21 July 2009 05:47:23 UTC