Proposed response to: OWL Reference comment - RDF Schema for OWL

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: OWL Reference comment - RDF Schema for OWL
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/2003May/0082.html

 > On Mon, 12 May 2003 14:19:59 +0200
 > Guus Schreiber <schreiber@cs.vu.nl> wrote:
 >
 > > Dave,
 > >
 > > Thanes for your comment. See responses in-line.
 > >
 > > Dave Beckett wrote:
 > >
 > > >   OWL Web Ontology Language Reference
 > > >   W3C Working Draft 31 March 2003
 > > >
 > > >   Appendix B. RDF Schema of OWL (Normative)
 > > >   http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-ref-20030331/#appB
 > > >
 > > > The RDF schema for OWL appears in a Normative appendix of the
 > > > Informative OWL Reference
 > >
 > > Appendix B is not normative. Te label "(normative)" in the Appendix
 > > title is an update error. It has been corrected in the editor's 
drafts [1].
 > >
 > > Note: the editor's draft is an unofficial version maintained by the
 > > editors to keep track of editorial changes during LC.
 >
 > So that means there is no normative description in machine readable form
 > of the OWL vocabulary, in OWL, as written down in RDF/XML.  Is
 > all the OWL vocabulary expected to be built-in application knowledge?
 > What is the purpose of this section?  It would benefit from an 
explanation.
 >
 > The location of this work in the OWL reference, not S&AS tends to
 > suggest it is not "part" of OWL since OWL Reference does not define OWL.

Dave,

The role of the RDF Schema is to give ontology builders and tool
developers structured information about the OWL vocabulary.
In Sec. 1.7 the role of Appendix B is explained as follows:

[[
Appendix B contains an RDF schema for the OWL language
constructs. This schema provides information about the OWL vocabulary
in a form that can be understood by RDF Schema
processors. Conventionally, classes have a leading uppercase
character; properties a leading lowercase character. Thus,
owl:Ontology is a class, and owl:imports is a property. Appendix C
gives a tabular overview of all OWL language constructs in terms of
the built-in OWL classes and properties (the latter with their domain
and range).

NOTE: The RDF Schema file for OWL is not expected to be imported
explicitly (i.e., with owl:imports) into an ontology. The schema has
an informative status and is meant to provide the classes and
properties to be used in the RDF/XML syntax. . People that do
import this schema should expect the resulting ontology to be an OWL
Full ontology.
]]

We suggest the second sentence could have been phrased more clearly as
follows:

[[
This schema provides information about the OWL vocabulary that could
be a useful reference point for ontology builders and tool
developers. The restrictions provided by the schema on the OWL classes
and properties are informative and not complete.  Also, this schema
does not make distinctions between OWL Full, OWL DL and OWL Lite.
]]

[The last sentence was moved forward from the NOTE..]


 > > > Can you have a normative part of an informative document?  It might
 > > > be that it would be better to describe more fully the status of this
 > > > appendix content.
 > > >
 > > > Please also include the URI of the RDF/XML that this appendix
 > > > corresponds to or may be found, if there is one so that it may be
 > > > used directly -- for example, in testing.  At present, you have to
 > > > cut and paste the HTML.
 > > >
 > >
 > > We added a link to such an document in the editor's draft.
 > > See: http://www.daml.org/2002/06/webont/owl
 >
 > The new reference in AppB of [1] is appreciated.
 > (Although W3C style probably suggests you give the "http://" part of 
the URL also)

That was sloppy of us. We added the "http://".

 >
 > >
 > >
 > > > (This is unrelated to the question of the bits found behind when
 > > > dereferencing some XML Namespace URI - I just ask that the URL of the
 > > > this content be made available. )
 > > >
 > > > Thanks
 > > >
 > > > Dave
 > >
 > > Please let us know whether this response is satisfactory.
 > >
 > > Thanks, Guus
 > >
 > >
 >
 > I would like to get a further explanation of the purpose of this
 > schema and section before I consider this comment addressed.  If you
 > could propose an explanation, that may help me.
 >
 > Dave

The editor's draft [1] contains the suggested changes.

Please let us know, cc-ing public-webont-comments@w3.org, whether this
response is satisfactory.

Guus


[1] http://www.daml.org/2002/06/webont/owl-ref-proposed

-- 
Free University Amsterdam, Computer Science
De Boelelaan 1081a, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Tel: +31 20 444 7739/7718
E-mail: schreiber@cs.vu.nl
Home page: http://www.cs.vu.nl/~guus/

Received on Thursday, 19 June 2003 10:15:49 UTC