- From: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 15:45:05 +0000
- To: "Michael Schneider" <schneid@fzi.de>
- Cc: "OWL 2" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Thanks! I will pass this on. Regards, Ian On 7 Mar 2010, at 15:31, Michael Schneider wrote: > Hi! > > I had a look at chapters 4 ("OWL Compatibility") and 6 ("Conformance > Clauses"). My overall impression was fine, but I found that there are still > a few issues that should probably be reported. > > 1) Chapter 4: In the whole chapter, the terms "direct semantics", > "RDF-Based semantics", "structural specification", and "RDF semantics" are > repeatedly written in lower case (as written in this sentence). In the OWL 2 > documents, however, these terms are generally in upper case, as in "Direct > Semantics"; see for example the OWL 2 Overview > <http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview/>. I believe the RIF document should > follow this practice. > > 2) Chapter 4, 4th paragraph, first sentence: This sentence talks about the > RDF mapping, but misses a citation to our "Mapping to RDF" document. > > 3) Section 4.2: The titles of the subsections are given as "OWL RDF-Based > Semantics" and "OWL Direct Semantics", i.e., the "2" of "OWL 2" is missing > in both cases. I don't know whether this was intended or just typos. We > should mention it in the report at least. > > 4) Section 4.2.1, first sentence: The sentence refers to the "OWL 2 Full > vocabulary". Howerver, in the RDF-Based Semantics spec (Sec. 3.2) it is > called the "OWL 2 RDF-Based Vocabulary". Btw, this term is also upper-cased > in the OWL 2 document, while "vocabulary" is written lower-case in the RIF > document. > > Michael > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: public-owl-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-owl-wg-request@w3.org] >> On Behalf Of Ian Horrocks >> Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 6:29 PM >> To: OWL 2 >> Subject: Re: RIF RDF and OWL Compatibility and OWL Semantics >> >> Dear OWL WG, >> >> Sorry to disturb your well earned repose, but we really should respond >> to RIF's response to our comment about their use of OWL Full Semantics' >> and 'OWL DL Semantics'. Everything now seems OK to me and, unless I hear >> to the contrary, I will respond confirming that we are satisfied. >> >> Regards, >> Ian >> >> >> >> On 10 Dec 2009, at 10:29, Jos de Bruijn wrote: >> >>> Dear Ian, >>> >>> Thank you for bringing this naming issue to our attention. >>> We have updated the naming in the wiki version of the document [1] >>> accordingly. >>> >>> We have also updated the URIs of the import profiles in section 5.1.1 >> to >>> those defined by the semantic web coordination group. >>> >>> >>> Best, Jos >>> >>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/SWC >>> [2] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/SWC#Conformance_Clauses >>> >>> Ian Horrocks wrote: >>>> Dear RIF WG, >>>> >>>> The current SWC document uses the terms 'OWL Full Semantics' and 'OWL >> DL >>>> Semantics'. However, the OWL Working Group, in the recently published >>>> OWL 2 Recommendation, has tried to clarify these notions by >> separating >>>> syntax and semantics. In OWL 2, it is made clear that OWL 2 DL is a >>>> syntactic restriction and not, per se, a definition of a particular >>>> semantics. For semantics, we refer to the 'OWL 2 Direct Semantics' >> and >>>> 'OWL 2 RDF-Based Semantics', either of which could be applied to an >> OWL >>>> 2 DL ontology. >>>> >>>> We realise that this may come a bit too late in the process (and the >> OWL >>>> WG also acknowledges the issue of accepted terminology, see the >> thread >>>> at[1]). However, we wonder whether the RIF WG would still consider >>>> updating the RDF and OWL Compatibility document to reflect the >>>> terminology used in OWL 2 -- we believe that there would be a benefit >> to >>>> RIF in terms of increased clarity and consistency with the latest >>>> version of OWL. >>>> >>>> Note that the current discussion on the Semantic Web Coordination >>>> Group[2] that will provide generic URI-s for entailment regimes (and >>>> which may be an alternative to the URI-s listed in 5.1.1. of the >>>> document) will probably reflect the updated terminology. >>>> >>>> Sincerely >>>> >>>> On behalf of the OWL Working Group >>>> >>>> Ian Horrocks, Chair >>>> >>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview/ >>>> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-semweb- >> cg/2009Oct/0051.html >>>> >>>> >> > > -- > Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider > Research Scientist, 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 Sunday, 7 March 2010 15:45:34 UTC