Copyright © 2006 by the Submitters. This document is available under the W3C Document License. See the W3C Intellectual Rights Notice and Legal Disclaimers for additional information.
OWL 1.1 extends the W3C OWL Web Ontology Language with a small but useful set of features that have been requested by users, for which effective reasoning algorithms are now available, and that OWL tool developers are willing to support. The new features include extra syntactic sugar, additional property and qualified cardinality constructors, extended datatype support, simple metamodelling, and extended annotations. This document provides a high-level overview of these features.
This section describes the status of this document at the time of its publication. Other documents may supersede this document. A list of current W3C publications can be found in the W3C technical reports index at http://www.w3.org/TR/.
By publishing this document, W3C acknowledges that the Submitting Members have made a formal Submission request to W3C for discussion. Publication of this document by W3C indicates no endorsement of its content by W3C, nor that W3C has, is, or will be allocating any resources to the issues addressed by it. This document is not the product of a chartered W3C group, but is published as potential input to the W3C Process. A W3C Team Comment has been published in conjunction with this Member Submission. Publication of acknowledged Member Submissions at the W3C site is one of the benefits of W3C Membership. Please consult the requirements associated with Member Submissions of section 3.3 of the W3C Patent Policy. Please consult the complete list of acknowledged W3C Member Submissions.
Please send feedback to firstname.lastname@example.org, which has a public archive.
The initial design of the W3C OWL Web Ontology Language (OWL) was conservative in several ways. Constructs that did not have considerable support from within the W3C Web Ontology Working Group were not included. Constructs for which effective reasoning methods were not known or expected to be known in future were also not included.
Usage of OWL, particularly the OWL DL species of OWL, has identified several constructs that are of considerable utility and that fit well within the representation philosophy of OWL DL. Advances in the theory of Description Logics have provided a basis for reasoning with constructs that are not part of OWL, or not part of OWL DL.
For both these reasons, it was decided at the first OWL: Experiences and Directions workshop to design an extension to the OWL DL species of OWL. The extension is designed to provide simple extensions to OWL DL that
This document provides a high-level overview of OWL 1.1. The OWL 1.1 syntax document [OWL 1.1 Syntax] defines the normal syntax for OWL 1.1 and give some informal information on the semantics of the new constructs. There will be an OWL 1.1 semantics document that formally defines the semantics of all of OWL 1.1, but the general intent is that the semantics of OWL 1.1 is the same as that of [SROIQ]. with a simple datatype theory.
The features added in OWL 1.1 fall into four main categories:
OWL 1.1 provides two constructs that are simply syntactic sugar, to make some common idioms easier to write.
The first syntactic sugar construct, DisjointUnion, defines one description as the disjoint union of a set of descriptions. It is simply a combination of a DisjointClasses axiom and an EquivalentClasses axiom of the first description as the union of the rest.
The second syntactic sugar construct is negative property membership assertions NegativeObjectPropertyAssertion and NegativeDataPropertyAssertion.
OWL 1.1 provides extra Description Logic expressive power, moving from the SHOIN Description Logic that underlies OWL DL to the SROIQ Description Logic. The additions are:
OWL 1.1 allows user-defined datatypes, using a mechanism similar to that in Protege. User-defined datatypes can use most of the well-behaved datatype facets available from [XML Schema Datatypes].
This facility can be used in defining new datatypes that can be used in the ontology, as in SubClassOf(Adult DataSomeValuesFrom(age DatatypeRestriction(xsd:integer 1 minInclusive "18"^^xsd:integer)).
Simple relationships between values of functional data-valued properties can be used as restrictions, as in DataSomeValuesFrom(shoeSize IQ greaterThan). The underlying theory of datatypes used in these restrictions is taken from [XML Schema Datatypes].
In OWL 1.1 a name (such as Person) can be used as any or all of an individual, a class, or a property. The computational problems that would arise if this were treated as in RDF are avoided by ensuring that no aspect of the use of the name as an individual has any effect on the meaning of the name as a class. Such a treatment of metamodeling is often called punning.