W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-shapes@w3.org > July 2014

Re: ShEx relation to SPIN/OWL

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <Peter.Patel-Schneider@nuance.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 07:03:57 -0700
Message-ID: <53BE9D4D.2060607@nuance.com>
To: <public-rdf-shapes@w3.org>
> From: Arthur Ryman <ryman@ca.ibm.com>
> Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 10:58:24 -0400
> To: "public-rdf-shapes@w3.org" <public-rdf-shapes@w3.org>
> Message-ID: <OFF14B15B5.802B33E2-ON85257D0A.004C62E1-85257D0A.005240FE@ca.ibm.com>
>
> I'd like to back up a little and discuss the need for something other than
> OWL and SPARQL.

[...]

> Another important requirement is that a constraint language should be
> independent of any vocabulary or ontology since it is often the case that
> an RDF document combines terms from multiple sources. Both OWL and RDFS
> fail on this count.

I believe that this is false.  Can you provide examples where OWL or RDFS fail 
on this count, particularly where the combination of multiple sources 
contributes to the failure?

[...]

> Regards,
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Arthur Ryman, PhD
>
> Chief Data Officer, Rational
> Chief Architect, Portfolio & Strategy Management
> Distinguished Engineer | Master Inventor | Academy of Technology
>
> Toronto Lab | +1-905-413-3077 (office) | +1-416-939-5063 (mobile)
>
>

peter
Received on Thursday, 10 July 2014 14:04:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:02:39 UTC