Re: Expections for OWL Time evolution

Hi Evan,

Thank you very much for your comments.

Yes, in the note [1] we provide a reference [2] to a first-order logic 
(FOL) axiomatization of the ontology, which includes a rich collection of 
axioms that tightly constrain the interpretation of the predicates and 
functions described in the note.

As the expressivity of the Semantic Web languages increase, depending 
on the logic they will support (e.g., full FOL or Horn logic), we would 
like to encode the entire or a subset of our FOL axiomatization of the 
ontology in the improved or new Semantic Web (rule) languages.

Please let us know if you have any further questions or comments.


- Feng Pan and Jerry Hobbs

[2] Hobbs, J. R. and Pan, F. 2004. An Ontology of Time for the Semantic 
Web. ACM Transactions on Asian Language Processing (TALIP): Special issue 
on Temporal Information Processing, Vol. 3, No. 1, March 2004, pp. 66-85.

On Mon, 6 Feb 2006 wrote:

> Hello,
> At the Best Practices face-to-face meeting in November there was a
> brief discussion about expections for the OWL time ontology discussed
> in the OEP note [1] you authored. The concern was with how this would
> evolve with the languages underlying the Semantic Web.  I voiced the
> expectation that, as the Semantic Web languages improve in
> expressivity (say if OWL were revised to be more expressive and/or a
> SW Rule language were Recommended), the description for OWL Time would
> also be revised to exploit this increased expressivity to
> refine/constrain the interpretation of the terms it currently
> describes.  Did you anticipate that the Time ontology and/or its
> vocabulary would evolve in this way, or do you just think of it as an
> artifact of the current Semantic Web to be replaced by some new
> description as the languages evolve?
> -Evan
> Evan K. Wallace
> Manufacturing Systems Integration Division
> [1]

Feng Pan, Ph.D. Candidate
USC Information Sciences Institute (ISI)

Received on Monday, 6 February 2006 23:30:49 UTC