Re: SPARQL and the owl web language

ClŠudio,

I'm a member of the DAWG currently working on the SPARQL specification
and I just wanted to point you to a couple of our documents to help you
answer (or maybe not) your question:

>From our charter document [1]:

[[[
The protocol will allow access to a notional RDF graph. This may in
practice be the virtual graph which would follow from some form of
inference from a stored graph. This does not affect the data access
protocol, but may affect the description of the data access service. For
example, if OWL DL semantics are supported by a service, that may be
evident in the description of the service or the virtual graph which is
queried, but it will not affect the protocol designed under this charter.

]]]

Note that we did not engage in building a service description
specification, but nonetheless, it's no part of our spec.

There has been a LOT of discussion on the issue by the working group
members, organizations and individual parties. We've labeled the issue
owlDisjunction and as of 01/26/2006 we have decided [2] to postpone the
issue given an agreement on the current wording of the spec.

Regards,

Elias Torres

PS> I've copied the public-sparql-dev@w3.org mailing list to increase
the awareness of the list for SPARQL related questions.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2003/12/swa/dawg-charter#rdfs-owl-queries
[2] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#owlDisjunction

ClŠudio Fernandes wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> 
> I've recently bumped with some (naive?) questions about SPARQL and the
> OWL language:
> 
> We know that SPARQL is a query language for RDF [1], and that the owl
> language [2] is a vocabulary extension of RDF. Put it that way, is
> SPARQL "big" enough to query correctly an ontology described by the owl
> language? If it isn't, what is the "main" query language to do that, if
> any exist? OWL-QL?    
> 
> The bottom line is: if i want to build a semantic web agent, capable of
> querying an ontology, should i bet in rdf + SPARQL? or owl + ?? 
> Will i be betting in the wrong horse if i go through the owl language
> only and discard the potentialities of SPARQL? Or I'm i really confused
> and the truth is in rdf/owl + SPARQL? And which are my limits in this
> case?  
> 
> thanks in advance for your time/thoughts, 
> 
> [1] - http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-rdf-sparql-query-20060220/
> [2] - http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/
> 

Received on Saturday, 18 March 2006 17:02:50 UTC