W3C W3C Member Submission

OWL 1.1 Web Ontology Language

W3C Member Submission 19 December 2006

This version:
Latest version:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider, Bell Labs Research, Lucent Technologies
Ian Horrocks, The University of Manchester
Bernardo Cuenca Grau, The University of Manchester


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.

Status of this document

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 public-owl-dev@w3.org, which has a public archive.

Table of Contents

1 Overview

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

  1. have been requested by major users of OWL DL;
  2. have effective reasoning methods, as evidenced by theoretical results; and
  3. are expected to be implemented by the developers of OWL DL reasoners.

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.

2 Features

The features added in OWL 1.1 fall into four main categories:

  1. syntactic sugar to make some commonly-stated things easier to say;
  2. new Description Logic constructs;
  3. expanded datatype expressiveness; and
  4. metamodeling constructs.

2.1. Syntactic Sugar

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.

2.2. SROIQ

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:

qualified cardinality restrictions
such as ObjectMinCardinality(2 friendOf hacker);
local reflexivity restrictions
on noncomplex properties only, such as ObjectExistsSelf(likes) for narcissists;
reflexive, irreflexive, symmetric, and antisymmetric properties
for noncomplex properties only, such as ReflexiveObjectProperty(knows) and IrreflexiveObjectProperty(husbandOf);
disjoint properties
for non-complex properties only, such as DisjointObjectProperties(childOf spouseOf); and
property chain inclusion axioms
such as SubObjectPropertyOf(SubObjectPropertyChain(owns part) owns), provided that there are no cyclic inclusions.

2.3. Datatypes

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].

2.4. Metamodeling and annotations

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.


[OWL 1.1 Specification]
OWL 1.1 Web Ontology Language: Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax. Peter F. Patel-Schneider, Ian Horrocks, and Boris Motik, eds., 2006.
The Even More Irresistible SROIQ. Ian Horrocks, Oliver Kutz, and Uli Sattler. In Proc. of the 10th Int. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2006). AAAI Press, 2006.
[XML Schema Datatypes]
XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes Second Edition. Paul V. Biron and Ashok Malhotra, eds. W3C Recommendation 28 October 2004.