[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Interpreting OWL

To: <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "sean barker" <sean.barker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 20:13:28 +0100
Message-id: <357B8019161246B4930F7647DD939870@SMB>
    Thank you for your answer on the relative expressive powers of OWL and EXPRESS.
Matthew, Ian
    I was not actually proposing to write EXPRESS in OWL, although I believe there is a tool by the name of Reeper that does the translation for you, but I would agree it's not a sensible thing to do.
    The point was rather that, if in the semantic web, one came across something that said it was a AP214:Part which was a subtype of a STEP:Product which is a subtype of EXPRESS:Entity, which is a subtype of OLW:thing, would current approaches to the semantic web interpret it correctly? The reason for asking this question is that, in my experience, let a computer programmer loose with some constuct which is intended to have a conventional interpretation and they will ignore the convention, and manipulated according to its computational properties. My understanding is that "semantics" in "semantic web" is concerned with the semantics of the logical operators, rather than the semantics of the terms, such as instantiate from OWL:thing. Hence, if one were to interpret OWL:thing as simply the modelling construct EXPRESS:Entity, would subsequent subtyping to STEPProduct or STEP:Version make further interpetation impossible? Or would this provide another form of Upper Ontology?
Sean Barker, Bristol

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (01)

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