RE: Face-to-Face: General Requirements Reading

I have a general requirement to propose.  Perhaps it has been identified
elsewhere, but I haven't seen it mentioned.

 OWL language literals will include any well-formed XML document.

In order to be maximally successful, OWL needs to be able to deal with the
'ontologies' that are taking over the web at the moment.  These are the XML
standards that are being promulgated, whose semantics, such as they are, are
defined in natural language or operationally, by the processes that handle

There already exist a vast number of documents based on these shared XML
schemas and DTDs.  One major potential use of OWL is to make logical
assertions about such objects.  E.g., "this ebXML PurchaseOrder has been
validated as having been sent by EDS".  While an ontology might not be
committed to detailing the full semantics of a PO, it could be used to
reason about a specific set of sub-properties.

In order for OWL to be capable of integrating with these partial ontologies,
it should be the case that OWL language literals include any well-formed XML
document (pick your definition of well formed, perhaps just syntactic,
perhaps optionally schema-validated).  Maybe this need is expected to be
satisfied by the fact that most of the examples of literals already include
strings as permitted data types.  But it would seem more useful to make
parsed documents directly available as literals.  

This capability might also be used to support reification.  Though it
provides no help at all with the more important question of what the
semantics of reification might be.

- Mike

Michael K. Smith
EDS Austin Innovation Lab
98 San Jacinto, Suite 500
Austin, TX 78701
Work: 512 404-6683
Cell: 512 789-4477
Fax : 512 404-6655

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Heflin []
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 12:25 PM
To: WebOnt
Subject: Face-to-Face: General Requirements Reading

Attached below is the final draft of the General Requirements document
for the face-to-face meeting next week. Please read this before the
meeting and determine if there are issues you would like to discuss
during the meeting. In particular, the General Requirements subgroup
welcomes feedback on the completeness of the requirements we have

Jeff Heflin

Received on Monday, 7 January 2002 14:37:07 UTC