- From: David Decraene <David@landcglobal.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 08:51:55 +0200
- To: "Alan Ruttenberg" <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Cc: "w3c semweb hcls" <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>, "Frank Montyne" <frank@landcglobal.com>, "Christoffel Dhaen" <christoffel@landcglobal.com>
This is indeed what I was referring too/looking for, I am glad to see this might be resolved in a future update. Much obliged, David -----Original Message----- From: Alan Ruttenberg [mailto:alanruttenberg@gmail.com] Sent: donderdag 21 september 2006 7:25 To: David Decraene Cc: w3c semweb hcls Subject: Re: Modeling large scale ontologies in OWL: Unmet needs Hello David, I think you are referring to the lack of qualified cardinality restrictions (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/OEP/QCR/) The proposed OWL 1.1 includes them and should shortly (in the next few months) be supported by the major OWL reasoners, including Pellet, and FaCT++ (and hence Protege). OWL 1.1 is described at http://owl1_1.cs.manchester.ac.uk/. In the overview search for SROIQ. There is an OWL workshop coming up: http://owl-workshop.man.ac.uk/ OWLWorkshop06.html Perhaps you should consider attending. Let me know if I've misunderstood. Regards, Alan
Received on Thursday, 21 September 2006 06:52:12 UTC