[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Editor COE view of a new list of categories

To: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 21:30:58 -0400
Message-id: <900AE82B-C2DD-4126-A540-E007E7554BCE@xxxxxxxxx>
On Jul 14, 2007, at 9:42 AM, John F. Sowa wrote:    (01)

> OWL is a very simple language, which just represents triples. The  
> elements of those triples may be uninterpreted strings or pointers  
> to combinations of triples that ultimately reduce to uninterpreted  
> strings.    (02)

I would agree that, considered among the wide variety of human  
languages, OWL is a very simple language.  I don't really understand  
why you say the rest, as I'm certain you know better. OWL-DL, the  
part of OWL whose computational properties are best understood,  
allows one to express exactly what can be expressed by a certain  
portion of first order logic[1]. Only one of the ways of writing OWL  
involves using a syntax involving triples, in another, the "Abstract  
syntax" there is no sight of them. So OWL does not represent triples,  
rather triples can represent OWL.    (03)

As you point out in a subsequent message, the semantics of OWL can be  
captured by SCL. I would be interested in knowing which portion of  
SCL - (OWL in SCL) prevents the second issue you raise about  
"ultimately reduc[ing] to uninterpreted strings".    (04)

-Alan    (05)

[1] On the Relative Expressiveness of Description Logics and  
Predicate Logics     (06)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (07)

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