- From: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu>
- Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2002 18:06:32 -0400
- To: WebOnt <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Here are my initial thoughts on the issue: We need various properties to handle elements of versioning with ontologies. My proposed solution consists of adding three new features to owl. These are for indicating prior versions, backward copatibility and deprecation. Prior versions: ---------------- <url> priorVersion <url>. The second URL is an earlier version of the first. This has no meaning in the semantics, but could be used by software to organize ontologies by versions. Due to XML namespaces the identifiers in the two ontologies will be treated as distinct unless there are explicit statements of equivalence. Thus, the two ontologies can be merged without problems, although there will be no "integration" unless specific mappings are defined. Backward compatibility: ------------------------ <url> backCompatWith <url>. The first URL is a later version of the second, and is "semantically" backward compatible with it. This is basically syntactic sugar with the following effects: Assuming A backCompatWith B, then: * A priorVersion B. * all classes in B are the sameClassAs a class in A with the same ID. * all properties in B are the samePropertyAs a property in A with the same ID. Note this depends on the resolution of the synonym issue (I prefer sameAs for both classes and properties). The sameAs statements essentially allow you to integrate data that commit to different (backward-compatible) versions of the same ontology. Note, that this approach does not address the problem described in Section 3.2 of the Requirements Document (under RDF(S) Support). There, we gave an example where we wanted to "fix" an incorrect definition of Dolphin. Note, given the approach here, we cannot make the new version of the ontology backward-compatible with the old one because that would say that the class of Dolphins is both a sublcass of Fish and Mammal. I am still working on a clean way to solve this problem that meshes with the model theories we are working towards. We may have to save this for a "next version" of OWL. Deprecation: ------------- <url> deprecates <classId> <url> deprecates <propertyId> This allows an ontology to deprecate a class or property. By deprecating the term, it means it still is sameAs a term with the same ID in the new ontology, but that the term should not be used in new ontologies. This allows an ontology to maintain backward-compatibility while phasing out old vocabulary. Deprecation should only be used in ontologies that are backward-compatible. This has no effect on the semantics, but authoring tools should use it in error checking OWL markup. Note that deprecation allows you to break the transitivity of the backCompatWith relation. Jeff References: ------------ - Dynamics Research Corporation. DRC VES (Versioning) Ontology. At: http://orlando.drc.com/daml/Ontology/VES/3.2/drc-ves-ont.daml - Heflin, J. Towards the Semantic Web: Knowledge Representation in a Dynamic, Distributed Environment. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Maryland, College Park. 2001. At: http://www.cse.lehigh.edu/~heflin/pubs/#heflin-thesis (Sect. 3.4) - Heflin, J. and Hendler, J. Dynamic Ontologies on the Web. In Proceedings of the Seventeenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-2000). AAAI/MIT Press, Menlo Park, CA, 2000. pp. 443-449. At: http://www.cse.lehigh.edu/~heflin/pubs/#aaai2000 - Klein, M. and Fensel, D. Ontology Versioning on the Semantic Web. In First International Semantic Web Working Symposium (SWWS'01), 2001. At: http://www.semanticweb.org/SWWS/program/full/paper56.pdf
Received on Monday, 9 September 2002 18:06:35 UTC