LC Responses/ML1

From OWL
Jump to: navigation, search

Alan is concerned about citation of our meeting minutes. See message


To: Maurizio Lenzerini <lenzerini@dis.uniroma1.it>
CC: public-owl-comments@w3.org
Subject: [LC response] To Maurizio Lenzerini, Diego Calvanese, Giuseppe De Giacomo, Riccardo Rosati

Dear Maurizio, Diego, Giuseppe and Riccardo,

Thank you for your comment
     <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/2009Jan/0014.html>
on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts.

Your comment is closely related to the one by Misha (see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/2009Jan/0019.html) and Ivan (see http://www.w3.org/mid/49881F19.7040209@w3.org).

The working group has decided to implement the editorial changes and will correct the typos, thanks for pointing them out. We have also decided to add to OWL 2 QL reflexive, irreflexive, & asymmetric property axioms. Moreover, we will fix the inaccuracies in the complexity table, following suggestions by Misha and discussions with you: for data complexity, we will add that OWL 2 QL is in AC_0, i.e., queries are first order rewritable and that the taxonomic complexity is NLogSpace-complete.

We have decided *not* to add sameAs to OWL 2 QL, but to add a paragraph that explains that, if one wants to handle ontologies that are OWL 2 QL plus sameAs, then one can use a preprocessing step that materializes the sameAs relation and uses it in query answering procedures to simulate individual equality reasoning (see http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Profiles#Feature_Overview_2).

Please acknowledge receipt of this email to <mailto:public-owl-comments@w3.org> (replying to this email should suffice). In your acknowledgment please let us know whether or not you are satisfied with the working group's response to your comment.

Regards,
Uli Sattler
on behalf of the W3C OWL Working Group



CUT AND PASTE THE BODY OF THE MESSAGE (I.E. FROM "Dear" TO "Group") INTO THE BODY OF AN EMAIL MESSAGE. SET THE To:, CC:, AND Subject: LINES ACCORDINGLY.

PLEASE TRY TO REPLY IN A WAY THAT WILL ALLOW THREADING TO WORK APPROPRIATELY, I.E., SO THAT YOUR REPLY CONTINUES THE THREAD STARTED BY THE ORIGINAL COMMENT EMAIL




We actually have the following comments on the section regarding OWL 2 QL. All of them refer to what we believe are simply typos.

1. The construct "asymmetric properties (AsymmetricObjectProperty)" should be moved from the list of non-supported constructs to the list of SUPPORTED axioms (since it can be already expressed using DisjointObjectProperties and InverseObjectProperties: R ISA NOT R^-). Correspondingly, the sentence "Furthermore, OWL 2 QL disallows the use of functional, transitive, asymmetric, reflexive and irreflexive object properties," should be changed into "Furthermore, OWL 2 QL disallows the use of functional, transitive, reflexive and irreflexive object properties,". Finally, in the syntax table below the above sentence, AsymmetricObjectProperty should be added to the list of allowed ObjectPropertyAxiom.

2. The sentence - existential quantification to a class expression or a data range (ObjectSomeValuesFrom in the subclass position) should be changed into - existential quantification to a class expression or a data range (ObjectSomeValuesFrom) in the subclass position

3. The sentence - property inclusions (SubObjectPropertyOf involving property chains) should be changed into - property inclusions (SubObjectPropertyOf) involving property chains