• F2F1 Breakout Session on OWL and RDF Compatibility

Note: This page is intended to be a record of the breakout session, not an evolving document. Do not modify this page except to make corrections to the record.

At the first F2F meeting, we had a 90-minute breakout session on "OWL Compatibility" (and RDF Compatibility).

Attendees

(around the table to the left)

• SandroHawke (chair)

• PeterPatelSchneider

• UliSattler

• BijanParsia

• ElisaKendall

• AndreasHarth

• DaveReynolds

• MikeDean

• EvanWallace (scribe)

• JingMei

• JeffPan

• MarkusKrötzsch

• MichaelSintek

• DieterFensel

• JosDeBruijn

Chair's Outbrief

• OWL Compatibility

  • We agreed that even in Phase 1 we need a Semantics Extensibility Point. (notes on that moved to that page.)

  • We agreed that the OWL Compatibility document should enumerate the best options for using RIF (which each different standard semantics) with OWL. These approaches can start to be enumerated on the OWL Compatibility Page.

• RDF Compatibility
  • We came up with a list of issues
    • Using RDF for facts
    • Using RDF to the rule syntax
    • Using RDF for n-ary facts
    • Making n-ary facts visible as RDF
    • Lists
    • Datatypes

    • Using RDF in a HiLog style

    • various URI/B-node issues, including De-Skolemizing function terms

Scribe's Notes

• See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2005Dec/att-0102/sw_compatibility_breakout.doc Or http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2005Dec/att-0106/sw_compatibility_breakout.txt