W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > December 2008

Re: OWLRL [was: ...(safeness)]

From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 10:48:00 +0000
Message-ID: <49424160.5080100@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
CC: RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>

Jos de Bruijn wrote:
> <snip/>
>> I say "if" we update the document because assuming Jos replaces his
>> OWL-DLP embedding by an OWL 2 RL embedding then we might decide that the
>> this document is redundant.
> This is something that should probably be discussed, but I do not think
> that my OWL 2 RL embedding will make the document redundant.
> The embeddings have different purposes.  My embedding is an embedding of
> RIF-OWL2RL combinations, whereas your embedding is more restrictive: it
> translates certain inference problems in OWL2RL to inference problems in
> RIF.  Therefore, your translation can be simpler than my embedding.  For
> example, you can use one ruleset that axiomatizes the semantics and
> combine it with any OWL2RL ontology in RDF graph form, whereas in my
> embedding things like subclass statements and domain and range
> statements need to be translated to rules, thereby requiring translation
> of each individual ontology.

True but my document currently provides both a static rule set which, as 
you say, processes any OWL2RL ontology in RDF graph form and separately 
an algorithm for translating an OWL2RL ontology (in RDF graph form) to a 
RIF rule set. The second is the one Sandro was suggesting dropping and 
seems redundant with your updated algorithm. If I drop that then the 
redundancy disappears and we just have to decide if the remainder of the 
OWL 2 RL doc (when improved) should end up as:

(a) A separate RIF standards track document
(b) A W3C Note
(c) A section in the OWL Profile document
(d) An appendix in your SWC document.

Hewlett-Packard Limited
Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
Registered No: 690597 England
Received on Friday, 12 December 2008 10:48:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:07:51 UTC