W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > April 2004

RE: [ALL] Human-friendly syntax for communicating OWL fragments

From: Uschold, Michael F <michael.f.uschold@boeing.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 16:48:41 -0700
Message-ID: <823043AB1B52784D97754D186877B6CF034F288C@xch-nw-12.nw.nos.boeing.com>
To: "Jim Hendler" <hendler@cs.umd.edu>, "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "Frank van Harmelen" <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>
Cc: <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>

"there is no reason for the whole world to have read the OWL 
S&AS document just so they can understand our examples "

One way to address this might be to have a short/sweet tutoiral on the AS.

One way to deal with the syntax shock Tim mentions (and that I continue to experience every time I see some), is to assume that in general, few folk in the world will be EXPECTED to read raw OWL (or RDF) syntax. Exceptions include those who need to be concerned about the syntax and parsing of the language. I advocate this position, something more readable is needed. If we agreed that far, we could begin discussion of what particular variant(s) are preferred.

Mike



 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Jim Hendler [mailto:hendler@cs.umd.edu] 
Sent:	Monday, April 05, 2004 2:11 PM
To:	Uschold, Michael F; Jeremy Carroll; Frank van Harmelen
Cc:	public-swbp-wg@w3.org
Subject:	RE: [ALL]  Human-friendly syntax for communicating OWL fragments

At 12:52 -0700 4/5/04, Uschold, Michael F wrote:
>As I understand it, RDF Schema is a subset of OWL, so why would the 
>abstract syntax would be less appropriate?
>
>Mike
>
>

because there is no reason for the whole world to have read the OWL 
S&AS document just so they can understand our examples -- esp. folks 
interested in RDF linking more than OWL's modeling properties.

>
>  -----Original Message-----
>From: 	Jeremy Carroll [mailto:jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com]
>Sent:	Tuesday, March 30, 2004 11:06 PM
>To:	Frank van Harmelen
>Cc:	Uschold, Michael F; public-swbp-wg@w3.org
>Subject:	Re: [ALL]  Human-friendly syntax for communicating 
>OWL fragments
>
>
>A further concern I have is that many Semantic Web users use mainly RDF
>with maybe just a tiny bit of OWL ... To communicate with them OWL Abstract
>Syntax is not appropriate.
>
>Jeremy

-- 
Professor James Hendler			  http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  240-277-3388 (Cell)
Received on Monday, 5 April 2004 19:54:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:30:53 UTC