- From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
- Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 23:48:41 +0100
- To: "Ian Horrocks" <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Cc: "W3C OWL Working Group" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <0EF30CAA69519C4CB91D01481AEA06A0011329E4@judith.fzi.de>
Hi Ian! >-----Original Message----- >From: public-owl-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-owl-wg-request@w3.org] >On Behalf Of Ian Horrocks >Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 6:50 PM >To: W3C OWL Working Group >Subject: LC responses 28, 48 & 58 > >I drafted them. They all depend on the agreed presentation changes >and probably shouldn't be sent until those are completed. > >Ian In the proposed answer to LC28 <http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/LC_Responses/FH2> it is stated: [[ OWL 2 separates syntax from semantics, and that OWL 2 Full, DL, QL, EL and RL are all refer to syntactic variants, ]] Frankly, this makes no sense to me. OWL 2 Full is certainly not a "syntactic variant", just as OWL 1 Full hasn't been. In the OWL 1 Full spec, there existed semantic-related terms like "OWL Full interpretation" and "OWL Full entails". And OWL Full was characterized as follows in a semantic way: <http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/rdfs.html#5.3> [[ OWL Full augments the common conditions with conditions that force the parts of the OWL universe to be the same as their analogues in RDF. [...] ]] With this in mind, in the RDF-Based Semantics document I have used the term "OWL 2 Full" exclusively to mean the /semantics/. But Jonathan Rees had a comment on this: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/2009Jan/0068.html [[ And are you sure that you want "OWL 2 Full" to be the name of a semantics? That seems OK to me, but it's sort of weird. In common use I think it will be taken to mean a language consisting of a combination of syntax (RDF in any of its serializations) and semantics (conditions on interpretation of the OWL 2 vocabulary). ]] This sounds reasonable to me, so I am strongly inclined to follow this comment. The term "OWL 2 Full" would then mean the whole language. But not the syntax alone. This would make no sense to me, because the syntax of OWL 2 Full is RDF, just as for OWL 1 Full and RDFS. Best, Michael -- Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider Research Scientist, Dept. Information Process Engineering (IPE) Tel : +49-721-9654-726 Fax : +49-721-9654-727 Email: michael.schneider@fzi.de WWW : http://www.fzi.de/michael.schneider ======================================================================= FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959 Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts, Az 14-0563.1, RP Karlsruhe Vorstand: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Rüdiger Dillmann, Dipl. Wi.-Ing. Michael Flor, Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Wolffried Stucky, Prof. Dr. Rudi Studer Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus =======================================================================
Received on Tuesday, 10 March 2009 22:49:24 UTC