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

Re: comparing to OWL and SPIN

From: Simon Spero <sesuncedu@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 10:04:07 -0400
Message-ID: <CADE8KM4HGO=BPP1x-iJdFAT1sS0XHy0-UaL=LFNx7_ggH2DP0A@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Cc: public-rdf-shapes@w3.org, "Dam, Jesse van" <jesse.vandam@wur.nl>
On Jul 17, 2014 9:25 AM, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>

> Note that I am not saying that an OWL reasoner will do constraint
checking directly out of the box, just that OWL (and RDFS) semantics (and
syntax) can be used to specify constraints.  An OWL-based constraint
checker would do things like reporting errors, just as any other constraint
checker does.

See e.g. chapter 6 of Jiao Tao's dissertation -
http://tw.rpi.edu/web/doc/JiaoTaoDissertation .

> I don't know why you say that OWL does not support graphs.

Possibly the benzene type issues that motivated the Description Graphs
extension ?


Received on Thursday, 17 July 2014 14:04:34 UTC

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