syntax task force - differences between the two approaches

Here is my summary of the differences between the two approaches.  I may be
missing some differences.

peter


Substantive Differences in Abstract Syntax

Jeremy - all ontology information in an abstract ontology is in a header
	 construct 
       - allows imports, etc, for multiple ontology resources in a single
         ontology 
S&AS   - abstract ontologies have a (single) optional name
       - all imports, etc. work off this name (or an unnamed resource)

Jeremy - all names in abstract syntax need tags
S&AS   - names in abstract syntax are not tagged

Jeremy - can name data valued oneOfs
S&AS   - can't name data valued oneOfs

Jeremy - incorporates some RDF container vocabulary
S&AS   - forbids RDF container vocabulary

Jeremy - allows rdf:XMLLiteral
S&AS   - forbids rdf:XMLLiteral

Jeremy - forbids unused owl: vocabulary (but not unused rdf: rdfs: or xsd:
	 vocabulary) 
S&AS   - allows any unused vocabulary

Jeremy - top-level unnamed descriptions (and restrictions) allowed in
	 abstract syntax
S&AS   - unnamed descriptions (and restrictions) can only occur inside
	 other constructs in the abstract syntax

Jeremy - non-DL properties (properties that are neither object or data
         properties) are divided into annotation properties and
         meta properties (should instead be ontology properties)
       - annotation properties can only relate to individuals and data
         values
       - ontology properties are a fixed, predefined set
S&SA   - non-DL properties are not sub-divided
       - non-DL properties can relate to any resource

Jeremy - annotation properties (but not ontology properties) have a
	 declaration that can have annotations 
S&AS   - no declaration for annotation properties

Jeremy - only binary equivalence and disjointness for classes
         (not a semantic restriction, of course)
S&AS   - n-ary equivalence and disjointness for classes

Jeremy - impossible to state some different/same patterns for unnamed
	 individuals 
S&AS   - impossible to state any different/same patterns for unnamed
	 individuals 

Jeremy - forbid complex single-property restrictions
S&AS   - allow complex single-property restrictions


Differences in development

Jeremy - syntax includes side condition on non-simple properties not
	 allowed in cardinality-restricting constructs
S&AS   - condition is a side condition


Substantive Differences in Mapping Rules not necessitated by differences in
the Abstract Syntax

Jeremy  - all names need rdf:type triples
S&AS    - ontologies and annotation properties do not need rdf:type triples


Bugs 

Jeremy - missing rdfs:seeAlso
       - rdfs:comment has wrong category
       - rdfs:isDefinedBy has multiple categories which is not supportable
       - lots of grammar ambiguities (but only benign ones)

S&AS   - lots of grammar ambiguities (but only benign ones?)
       - ....

Received on Wednesday, 26 February 2003 10:11:54 UTC