- From: Raphael Volz <volz@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de>
- Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 13:08:32 +0200
- To: "Webont" <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
This is indeed so. The major difference is not the findings but my approach is a little more restricted. Ian/Benjamin use an extended LP dialect, that offers equivalence, nonequivalence and of course negation. Since there is a broad line of research on LP with dozens of 'dialects', i.e. F-Logic, which offers existential quantificaton. I personally find it very difficult to draw a line between 'exotic' and 'standard' systems. Other variants allow disjunction in the head, which would allow for the implementation of disjunctive defined classes. For example, Ian and Ben's logic can offer maximum cardinality, since they can create rules that simulate counting via inequivalence. We could do that as well by interpreting the differentIndividualAs predicate as such, however I am not sure, whether this would be correct as the procedure shown in Ian/Bens paper relies on not having the UNA. Am I wrong ? Cheers, Raphael -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- Von: Frank van Harmelen [mailto:Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl] Gesendet: Samstag, 5. Oktober 2002 09:03 An: Ian Horrocks; Raphael Volz Cc: Rudi Studer Betreff: Re: Revised Version of OWL Lite Proposal Ian, Given the current state of your draft, I find it rather hard to identify the LP-definable subset (e.g. your conclusions about functional are that it cannot be done, or maybe yes but with a form or rules that is typically not allowed in LP, etc). Am I right in thinking that your conclusions more or less coincide with Raphaels? Frank. ---- Ian Horrocks wrote: > Raphael, > > Thanks for the very interesting document. As you may be aware, > Benjamin Grosof and I have also been working on a rather similar > analysis of what subset of OWL/DAML+OIL can be captured in rule > languages and have presented some preliminary findings to the DAML > joint committee. Our latest (very sketchy draft) is attached. Do I > have your permission to forward your document to Benjamin? > > Ian >
Received on Saturday, 5 October 2002 07:10:31 UTC