[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Database and Ontologies [was-Re: [ontolog-forum] A problem]

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Jack Park <jack.park@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 09:31:11 -0700
Message-id: <44E3484F.9050600@xxxxxxx>
citseer is temporarily down. The paper is online at
http://www.inf.unibz.it/%7ecalvanese/papers/calv-degi-lenz-SWWS-book-2002.pdf    (01)

Christopher Menzel wrote:
> On 8/16/06 8:57 AM, "Rex Brooks" <rexb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I find this thread curiously satisfying, since it is covering a
>> number of developments I have been involved with and/or following for
>> several years now. The mention of Siderean Seamark, about which I
>> learned a little last year, and the notion of quads, in addition to
>> triples leads to what I happen to think is the next  major task that
>> needs to be tackled (most likely by the W3C), namely moving RDF from
>> "triples" to "tuples" to pave the way for "n-ary databases."
> There does in fact appear to be a solution to this problem (which I've only
> recently been made aware of myself).  Calvanese, De Giacomo, and Lenzerini
> in their paper "A Framework for Ontology Integration"
> (http://tinyurl.com/reamq) describe a description logic DLR with n-ary
> relations that extends the description logic underlying OWL-DL without
> increasing its complexity.  It is straightforward to encode DLR in OWL-DL.
> For some reason this information does not seem to have made its way into the
> work of the W3C committee that is investigating n-ary extensions to RDF.  I
> am not an expert on OWL or DLs, but FWIW I am unable to see any theoretical
> reasons why a DLR encoding wouldn't do the job.
> Chris Menzel
>     (02)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (03)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>