- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 17:22:10 -0500
- To: "Raphael Volz" <volz@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de>, "Webont" <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
At 16:30 +0000 2/20/03, Raphael Volz wrote: >Hi - > >it is broken since there >is no such thing as an owl:Property, hence it >does NOT generate any valid OWL ontologies. > >In concluseion we do NOT have >" we have well over 100 ontologies that cleanly map from DAML to OWL, >so we have lots of examples (currently all the ontologies in the " > >as Jim claims. > The OwlConverter has been fixed to generate rdf:Property rather than owl:Property. Interestingly, since we once had owl:Property in some of the docs, the validator we were using didn't catch this error, suspect there are others as well. We will run a more complete set of tests when the Last Call documents are done -JH >Mit freundlichen Gru?en, >Best regards, > >Raphael Volz >Institut AIFB, Universitat Karlsruhe >http://www.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/WBS/rvo >volz@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de > >WIM, FZI Karlsruhe >http://wim.fzi.de/ >volz@fzi.de > >Fax: +49-1212-5-470-17-365 > > >-----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- >Von: www-webont-wg-request@w3.org >[mailto:www-webont-wg-request@w3.org]Im Auftrag von Jim Hendler >Gesendet: Donnerstag, 20. Februar 2003 14:55 >An: Ian Horrocks; Dan Connolly >Cc: Peter F. Patel-Schneider; Guus Schreiber; www-webont-wg@w3.org >Betreff: Re: Imports issue > > > >> >> >>As far as implementation in general is concerned, as I have mentioned >>before, you can't expect implementors to put too much effort in while >>the language specification still appears to be unstable! > >let me only address this issue -- it seems there is some >misunderstanding in the WG (not necessarily you Ian, I'm just using >this as an excuse for something I've been meaning to send for a >while): > >Our hope is to move from Last Call directly to Proposed >Recommendation (i.e. skipping the Candidate Recommendation phase). >To do this, we have to show TWO EXISTING IMPLEMENTATIONS of every >feature in the language. Proving something implementable is not >enough. The mail from Sean and Jeremy, for example, shows two >implementations of Imports, and thus that may be sufficient. We also >need same for everything else in our design. Our language won't be >stable, however, until after LC. As a result, if we don't want to >have to have a long CR period, we NEED people to start implementing >NOW (despite the instability) and then to tune as the language >finishes (at this point we are not making major changes likely to >require significant implementation changes) > >I've started working on our implementation report, and to move out of >LC I think we need the following: > i. Another independent implementation of Owl Lite. The Univ of >Maryland will do one, but we need another. (Note: I do not believe >it counts to say that all DL implementations also implement Lite, >because that doesn't help us validate the decision to have Lite as a >separate sublanguage). > ii. Two separate DL implementations that have actually been shown to >pass all, or at least most, of our DL tests (Euler will be needed in >the Full section). While I don't doubt there are a number of systems >around that COULD pass our tests, someone needs to actually show they >work. I'm hoping the "Manchester connection" (I.e. University and/or >Network Infernece) will do one - someone needs to volunteer to do >another (this could be as simple as writing a tool to cooerce our >test cases into Racer or other such system) > iii. As far as I can tell, none of our documents have been changed >to address the issue of what is expected in datatypes. This means >that as it currently stands, we need to produce two sound and >complete implementations that include all the possible rules for all >the xsd: datatypes and their combination. My hope is we'll fix this >by removing the requirement for sound and complete datatype reasoning >and put in something rational (OIL is a good model), but if not, we >will need these two implementations > iv. I think we will need a second participant to do a Owl type >checker like Sean is doing -- this is because we make a big deal >about this in the conformance part of Test. (If we were to water our >wording down a bit, we might be able to get away with one, so I'm not >too worried about this one) > >Here's the good news > we have well over 100 ontologies that cleanly map from DAML to OWL, >so we have lots of examples (currently all the ontologies in the >DAML library which can validate against DAML can be mapped to Owl >using the UM converter) > we have a number of DAML tools that are being adopted for OWL > we have several implementations of Full being done (I consider Euler >one of these, cwm another, and we have a student looking at mapping >Full to a FOL or HOL prover) > we have a couple of validators coming along - Mike's and Sean'si > we have at least two parsers (Jena as is, and a new UMd one) which >can create correct triples for OWL (Jeremy, I think this is true >based on my understanding of what is in Jena - I know you'll do more >eventually to make it more OWL aware, but I think it already counts >as a parser - if I'm wrong, please help me out) > Within the next week or so we will have at least one web site that >is entirely powered by RDF/OWL tools - it will demonstrate the >interoperability of a number of the pieces above. > > So - we either need to figure out that we can do all the things in >the "to be done" section by end of LC period, or we need to have a >Candidate Recommendation period with a call for implementations. >Given the fact that the number of working things (the good news) >outweighs the still needed part, I'm still hoping we can skip CR. > > >-- >Professor James Hendler hendler@cs.umd.edu >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 240-731-3822 (Cell) >http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler -- Professor James Hendler hendler@cs.umd.edu 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 240-731-3822 (Cell) http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler
Received on Thursday, 20 February 2003 17:22:29 UTC