RE: [regrep] ebXML Registry Profile for Web Ontology Language - a few comments

From
David RR Webber \(XML\) <>
Date
2006-06-20T16:07:24+00:00
ID
Thread
RE: [regrep] ebXML Registry Profile for Web Ontology Language - a few comments
Evan,

 

I may be mistaken - but I have definately seen the clarification and
call-out text vis OWL-Lite strongly put in this context.  Did it
not make it into the "Introduction" ?

 

That text exists if not and can be easily added - but I have a
feeling its there already...?

 

Thanks, DW

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re:
[regrep] ebXML Registry Profile for Web Ontology Language
- a few
comments
From: 
Date: Tue, June 20, 2006
10:57 am
To: ,


Nikola Stojanovic wrote:

>Here
are some comments on ebXML Registry Profile for Web
Ontology
>Language (OWL), Version 1.1, Draft OASIS Profile, June
13, 2006:
>

...

>1.
Generic

...

> c. AssociationTypes naming should be
consistent and follow
>ebRIM (UpperCase convention,
directionability, ...), Also, if
>"HasProperty" is used for
rdf:Property should other owl:XXXProperty be
>prefixed in the
same way -> "Has"?

A profile like this is trying to capture
the metamodel of another 
language in ebRIM.  Thus profiles
should have more relaxed naming rules
then other ebRIM uses. In this
case, the use of "Has" as a prefix of 
property is already somewhat
misleading.  Properties are first class
entities in RDF/OWL.
 

I am not sure of the scope of the above suggestion.
 The pattern 
owl:XXXProperty seems to only apply to
specializations of property such
as FunctionalProperty.  That
would be tolerable if undesirable.  However, 
application of
the "Has" prefix to subPropertyOf and subClassOf would result 
in
very confusing names indeed.  I would strongly object to such
names.

>3. Section 2 - It would be beneficial to state
why this profile
>only addresses OWL Lite.

Yes.  I
believe that I also asked for this in the earlier round of
reviews.

As I understand it, the reason for OWL lite only
support is that OWL Lite 
reasoning can almost be simulated with an
ebRIM based repository and queries, 
whereas the additional features
of OWL DL and OWL Full just to don't have any 
analog in RIM.
 This should, indeed, be explained in the
profile.

-Evan

Evan K.
Wallace

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To
unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC
that
generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all
your TCs in
OASIS
at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php