- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 16:22:17 -0500
- To: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
>Lately as I've been using and teaching OWL much more, I think I have >come to a better understanding of OWL vs. OWL DL and the real power >of having a reasoner-specific profile of OWL (i.e. OWL DL). I've >also begun scratching around on some papers and talking to some >colleagues, and it becomes clear that there are other subsets of OWL >Full that might also be tremendously useful for other kinds of >tools. For example, it became clear that a fair subset of the OWL >expressiveness can be accounted for in the calculus used by >relational database systems -- interestingly, although this is a >much less expressive language than OWL, some things which are >outside of OWL DL (particularly inverseFunctionalProperties on >datatype properties) are easily covered with that calculus. >Similarly, Guus had shown at one point (and it needs to be >revisited) that UML has a different set of restrictions than would >naturally be OWL DL. > So, this is mostly musing, but the question it brings up is whether >there is a common core of OWL that would like be in all of these >subsets, Well, one place to start is to ask whether RDFS represents a common part of these subsets or not. I would guess that rdfs:subPropertyOf might be the only thing that one could make out a case against. Of course, the actual common subset might be larger in other ways. Just a first thought. >or whether it makes sense to think of OWL as what is now referred to >as OWL Full, and to think of all these subsets as specialized >profiles for particular kinds of applications (and the commonality >would provide at least some kinds of interoperability - esp. with >respect to editing, visualization, etc.) > Anyone working on any of the OWL-xxx subsets they'd care to >discuss? I admit to starting work on OWL DB, which strikes me as an >important one if database integration is really going to be a major >application of OWL, and wonder if this is something that others are >playing with. > In short, I think it was Bijan who once commented that once OWL was >out there might be a cottage industry in creating special subsets >for particular application classes - seems like that might not be a >bad idea... I agree. Pat > -JH > >-- >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) -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32501 (850)291 0667 cell phayes@ihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Tuesday, 11 May 2004 17:22:19 UTC