index.html
59.6 KB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
1068
1069
1070
1071
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
1079
1080
1081
1082
1083
1084
1085
1086
1087
1088
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
1101
1102
1103
1104
1105
1106
1107
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1126
1127
1128
1129
1130
1131
1132
1133
1134
1135
1136
1137
1138
1139
1140
1141
1142
1143
1144
1145
1146
1147
1148
1149
1150
1151
1152
1153
1154
1155
1156
1157
1158
1159
1160
1161
1162
1163
1164
1165
1166
1167
1168
1169
1170
1171
1172
1173
1174
1175
1176
1177
1178
1179
1180
1181
1182
1183
1184
1185
1186
1187
1188
1189
1190
1191
1192
1193
1194
1195
1196
1197
1198
1199
1200
1201
1202
1203
1204
1205
1206
1207
1208
1209
1210
1211
1212
1213
1214
1215
1216
1217
1218
1219
1220
1221
1222
1223
1224
1225
1226
1227
1228
1229
1230
1231
1232
1233
1234
1235
1236
1237
1238
1239
1240
1241
1242
1243
1244
1245
1246
1247
1248
1249
1250
1251
1252
1253
1254
1255
1256
1257
1258
1259
1260
1261
1262
1263
1264
1265
1266
1267
1268
1269
1270
1271
1272
1273
1274
1275
1276
1277
1278
1279
1280
1281
1282
1283
1284
1285
1286
1287
1288
1289
1290
1291
1292
1293
1294
1295
1296
1297
1298
1299
1300
1301
1302
1303
1304
1305
1306
1307
1308
1309
1310
1311
1312
1313
1314
1315
1316
1317
1318
1319
1320
1321
1322
1323
1324
1325
1326
1327
1328
1329
1330
1331
1332
1333
1334
1335
1336
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<title>OWL Web Ontology Language Overview</title>
<link
href="http://www.w3.org/StyleSheets/TR/W3C-WD"
type="text/css" rel="stylesheet" />
<meta name="RCSId" content="$Id: Overview.html,v 1.7 2003/03/31 23:08:07 connolly Exp $"/>
</head>
<body lang="EN">
<div class="head">
<a href="http://www.w3.org/"><img height="48" alt="W3C"
src="http://www.w3.org/Icons/w3c_home" width="72" /></a>
<h1>OWL Web Ontology Language <br />Overview
</h1>
<h2><a id="w3c-doctype" name="w3c-doctype"></a>W3C Working
Draft 31 March 2003</h2>
<dl>
<dt>This version:</dt>
<dd><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-features-20030331/">http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-features-20030331/</a></dd>
<dt>Latest version:</dt>
<dd><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/">http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/</a></dd>
<dt>Previous version:</dt>
<dd><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-features-20030210/">http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-features-20030210/</a></dd>
<dt>Editors:</dt>
<dd>Deborah L. McGuinness (Knowledge Systems Laboratory,
Stanford University) <a
href="mailto:dlm@ksl.stanford.edu">dlm@ksl.stanford.edu</a></dd>
<dd>Frank van Harmelen (Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam) <a
href="mailto:Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl">Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl</a></dd>
</dl>
<p class="copyright"><a
href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice#Copyright">
Copyright</a> ©2003 <a
href="http://www.w3.org/"><acronym
title="World Wide Web Consortium">W3C</acronym></a><sup>®</sup>
(<a href="http://www.lcs.mit.edu/"><acronym
title="Massachusetts Institute of Technology">MIT</acronym></a>,
<a href="http://www.ercim.org/"><acronym
title="European Research Consortium for Informatics and Mathematics">
ERCIM</acronym></a> , <a
href="http://www.keio.ac.jp/">Keio</a>), All Rights Reserved.
W3C <a
href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice#Legal_Disclaimer">
liability</a>, <a
href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice#W3C_Trademarks">
trademark</a>, <a
href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-documents">
document use</a> and <a
href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-software">software
licensing</a> rules apply.</p>
<hr title="Separator for header" />
</div>
<h2><a id="abstract" name="abstract">Abstract</a></h2>
<p>The OWL Web Ontology Language is designed for use by
applications that need to process the content of information
instead of just presenting information to humans. OWL
facilitates greater machine readability of Web content than
that supported by XML, RDF, and RDF Schema by providing
additional vocabulary along with a formal semantics. OWL has
three increasingly-expressive sublanguages: OWL Lite, OWL DL,
and OWL Full.</p>
<p>This document is written for readers who want a first
impression of the capabilities of OWL. It provides an
introduction to OWL by informally describing the features of
each of the sublanguages of OWL. Some knowledge of <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/">RDF Schema</a> is
useful for understanding this document, but not essential.
After this document, interested readers may turn to the <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/">OWL
Guide</a> for a more detailed descriptions and extensive
examples on the features of OWL. The normative formal
definition of OWL can be found in the <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-owl-semantics-20021108/">OWL
Semantics and Abstract Syntax</a>.</p>
<h2><a id="status" name="status"></a>Status of this
document</h2>
<div class="status">
<p>This is a <a
href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process-20010719/tr.html#last-call">Last
Call Working Draft</a>. The <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-owl-features-20020729/">first release
of this document</a> was 29 July 2002 and the <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt">Web Ontology Working Group</a>
has made its best effort to address <a
href="http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/">comments
recieved</a> since then, releasing several drafts and resolving a <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html">list of
issues</a> meanwhile. The working group seeks confirmation that
comments have been addressed to the satisfaction of the community.</p>
<p>This is a <b>non-normative</b> overview of OWL; it does not provide
a definitive specification of OWL. The examples and other
explanatory material herein are provided to help understand OWL,
but may not always provide definitive or complete answers. The
normative formal definition of OWL can be found in the <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/">OWL
Semantics and Abstract Syntax</a>.</p>
<p>Comments on this document are due <span class="commentsDue
date">9 May 2003</span>. They should be sent to the W3C mailing
list <a
href="mailto:public-webont-comments@w3.org">public-webont-comments@w3.org</a>
(with <a
href="http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/">
public archive</a>).</p>
<p>
This document has been produced as part of the <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/">W3C Semantic Web Activity</a> (<a
href="http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Activity">Activity Statement</a>).
A list of <a rel="disclosure"
href="http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/discl">patent disclosures
related to this work</a> is maintained by W3C, regardless of whether
any such disclosures have been made or not.</p>
<p><em>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 Recommendations and
other technical reports is available at <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/">http://www.w3.org/TR/</a>.</em></p>
</div>
<h2><a id="contents" name="contents">Table of contents</a></h2>
<ol>
<li>
<a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s1">Introduction</a>
<ol>
<li><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s1.1">Document
Roadmap</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s1.2">Why
OWL?</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s1.3">The
three sublanguages of OWL</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s1.4">The
structure of this document</a></li>
</ol>
</li>
<li>
<a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s2">Language
Synopsis</a>
<ol>
<li><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s2.1">OWL
Lite Synopsis</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s2.2">OWL
DL and OWL Full Synopsis</a></li>
</ol>
</li>
<li>
<a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s3">Language
Description of OWL Lite</a>
<ol>
<li><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s3.1">OWL
Lite RDF Schema Features</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s3.2">OWL
Lite Equality and Inequality</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s3.3">OWL
Lite Property Characteristics</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s3.4">OWL
Lite Property Type Restrictions</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s3.5">OWL
Lite Restricted Cardinality</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s3.6">OWL
Lite Class Intersection</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s3.7">OWL
Datatypes</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s3.8">OWL
Lite Header Information</a></li>
</ol>
</li>
<li><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s4">Incremental
Language Description of OWL DL and OWL Full</a></li>
<li><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s5">Summary</a></li>
<li style="list-style: none"><br />
<a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s6">Acknowledgements</a></li>
</ol>
<hr />
<h2><a id="s1" name="s1"></a>1. Introduction</h2>
<p>This document describes the OWL Web Ontology Language. OWL
is intended to be used when the information contained in
documents needs to be processed by applications, as opposed to
situations where the content only needs to be presented to
humans. OWL can be used to explicitly represent the meaning of
terms in vocabularies and the relationships between those
terms. This representation of terms and their
interrelationships is called an ontology. OWL has more
facilities for expressing meaning and semantics than XML, RDF,
and RDF-S, and thus OWL goes beyond these languages in its
ability to represent machine readable content on the Web. OWL
is a revision of the <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/daml+oil-reference">DAML+OIL web
ontology language</a> incorporating lessons learned from the
design and application of DAML+OIL.</p>
<h3><a id="s1.1" name="s1.1"></a>1.1 Document Roadmap</h3>
<p>The OWL Language is described by a set of documents, each
fulfilling a different purpose, and catering for a different
audience. The following provides a brief roadmap for navigating
through this set of documents:</p>
<ul>
<li>This <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/">Owl
Overview</a> gives a simple introduction to OWL by providing
a language feature listing with very brief feature
descriptions;</li>
<li>The <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/">OWL
Guide</a> demonstrates the use of the OWL language by
providing an extended example. It also provides <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#OWLGlossary">glossary</a>
of the terminology used in these documents;</li>
<li>The <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/">OWL
Reference</a> gives a systematic and compact (but still
informally stated) description of all the modelling
primitives of OWL;</li>
<li>The <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-absyn/">OWL
Semantics and Abstract Syntax</a> document is the final and
formally stated normative definition of the language.</li>
</ul>
The suggested reading order of these documents is as given,
since they have been listed in increasing degree of technical
content.
<h3><a id="s1.2" name="s1.2"></a>1.2 Why OWL?</h3>
<p>The Semantic Web is a vision for the future of the Web in
which information is given explicit meaning, making it easier
for machines to automatically process and integrate information
available on the Web. The Semantic Web will build on XML's
ability to define customized tagging schemes and RDF's flexible
approach to representing data. The first level above RDF
required for the Semantic Web is an ontology language what can
formally describe the meaning of terminology used in Web
documents. If machines are expected to perform useful reasoning
tasks on these documents, the language must go beyond the basic
semantics of RDF Schema. The <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/">OWL Use Cases and
Requirements Document</a> provides more <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/#onto-def">details on
ontologies</a>, motivates the need for a Web Ontology Language
in terms of <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/#section-use-cases">six
use cases</a>, and formulates <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/#section-goals">design
goals</a>, <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/#section-requirements">requirements</a>
and <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/#section-objectives">objectives</a>
for OWL.</p>
<p>OWL has been designed to meet this need for a Web Ontology
Language. OWL is part of the growing stack of W3C
recommendations related to the Semantic Web.</p>
<ul compact="compact">
<li>
<p><a href="http://www.w3.org/XML/">XML</a> provides a
surface syntax for structured documents, but imposes no
semantic constraints on the meaning of these documents.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><a href="http://www.w3.org/XML/Schema">XML Schema</a> is
a language for restricting the structure of XML
documents.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-concepts-20021108/">RDF</a>
is a datamodel for objects ("resources") and relations
between them, provides a simple semantics for this
datamodel, and these datamodels can be represented in an
XML syntax.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-schema-20021112/">RDF
Schema</a> is a vocabulary for describing properties and
classes of RDF resources, with a semantics for
generalization-hierarchies of such properties and
classes.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>OWL adds more vocabulary for describing properties and
classes: among others, relations between classes (e.g.
disjointness), cardinality (e.g. "exactly one"), equality,
richer typing of properties, characteristics of properties
(e.g. symmetry), and enumerated classes.</p>
</li>
</ul>
<br />
<br />
<h3><a id="s1.3" name="s1.3"></a>1.3 The three sublanguages of
OWL</h3>
<p>OWL provides three increasingly expressive sublanguages
designed for use by specific communities of implementers and
users.</p>
<ul>
<li>
<p><a id="term_OWLLite" name="term_OWLLite"></a><em>OWL
Lite</em> supports those users primarily needing a
classification hierarchy and simple constraints. For
example, while it supports cardinality constraints, it only
permits cardinality values of 0 or 1. It should be simpler
to provide tool support for OWL Lite than its more
expressive relatives, and OWL Lite provides a quick
migration path for thesauri and other taxonomies.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><a id="term_OWLDL" name="term_OWLDL"></a><em>OWL DL</em>
supports those users who want the maximum expressiveness
while retaining computational completeness (all conclusions
are guaranteed to be computed) and decidability (all
computations will finish in finite time). OWL DL includes
all OWL language constructs, but they can be used only
under certain restrictions (for example, while a class may
be a subclass of many classes, a class cannot be an
instance of another class).
<!-- FvH: DELETED because too technical
with restrictions such as type separation (a class can not also be an individual or
property, a property can not also be an individual or class).
-->OWL DL is so named due to its correspondence with <a
href="http://dl.kr.org/"><em>description logics</em></a>, a
field of research that has studied the logics that form the
formal foundation of OWL.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><a id="term_OWLFull" name="term_OWLFull"></a><em>OWL
Full</em> is meant for users who want maximum
expressiveness and the syntactic freedom of RDF with no
computational guarantees. For example, in OWL Full a class
can be treated simultaneously as a collection of
individuals and as an individual in its own right. OWL Full
allows an ontology to augment the meaning of the
pre-defined (RDF or OWL) vocabulary. It is unlikely that
any reasoning software will be able to support complete
reasoning for every feature of OWL Full.</p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>Each of these sublanguages is an extension of its simpler
predecessor, both in what can be legally expressed and in what
can be validly concluded. The following set of relations hold.
Their inverses do not.</p>
<ul>
<li>Every legal OWL Lite ontology is a legal OWL DL
ontology.</li>
<li>Every legal OWL DL ontology is a legal OWL Full
ontology.</li>
<li>Every valid OWL Lite conclusion is a valid OWL DL
conclusion.</li>
<li>Every valid OWL DL conclusion is a valid OWL Full
conclusion.</li>
</ul>
<p>Ontology developers adopting OWL should consider which
sublanguage best suits their needs. The choice between OWL Lite
and OWL DL depends on the extent to which users require the
more-expressive constructs provided by OWL DL and OWL Full. The
choice between OWL DL and OWL Full mainly depends on the extent
to which users require the meta-modeling facilities of RDF
Schema (e.g. defining classes of classes, or attaching
properties to classes). When using OWL Full as compared to OWL
DL, reasoning support is less predictable since complete OWL
Full implementations do not currently exist.</p>
OWL Full can be viewed as an extension of RDF, while OWL Lite
and OWL DL can be viewed as extensions of a restricted view of
RDF. Every OWL (Lite, DL, Full) document is an RDF document,
and every RDF document is an OWL Full document, but only some
RDF documents wll be a legal OWL Lite or OWL DL document.
<h3><a id="s1.4" name="s1.4"></a>1.4 The structure of this
document</h3>
<p>This document first describes the features from OWL Lite,
followed by a description from the features that are added in
OWL DL and OWL Full (OWL DL and OWL Full contain the same
features, but OWL Full is more liberal about how these features
can be combined).</p>
<h2><a id="s2" name="s2"></a>2. Language Synopsis</h2>
This section provides a quick index to all the language
features for OWL Lite, OWL DL, and OWL Full.
<p>In this document, italicized terms are terms in OWL.
Prefixes of rdf: or rdfs: are used when terms are already
present in RDF or RDF Schema. Otherwise terms are introduced by
OWL. Thus, the term <i>rdfs:subPropertyOf</i> indicates that
subPropertyOf is already in the rdfs vocabulary (technically :
the rdfs namespace). Also, the term <i>Class</i> is more
precisely stated as <i>owl:Class</i> and is a term introduced
by OWL.</p>
<h3><a id="s2.1" name="s2.1"></a>2.1 OWL Lite Synopsis</h3>
<p>The list of OWL Lite language constructs is given below.</p>
<table cellspacing="30" width="100%">
<colgroup span="4" width="1">
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="index" valign="top">
<b>RDF Schema Features:</b>
<ul>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#Class">Class</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#property">rdf:Property</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#subClassOf">rdfs:subClassOf</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#subPropertyOf">
rdfs:subPropertyOf</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#domain">rdfs:domain</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#range">rdfs:range</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#Individual">Individual</a></i></li>
</ul>
</td>
<td class="index" valign="top">
<b>(In)Equality:</b>
<ul>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#equivalentClass">
equivalentClass</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#equivalentProperty">
equivalentProperty</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#sameIndividualAs">
sameIndividualAs</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#differentFrom">
differentFrom</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#allDifferent">
allDifferent</a></i></li>
</ul>
</td>
<td class="index" valign="top">
<b>Property Characteristics:</b>
<ul>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#inverseOf">inverseOf</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#TransitiveProperty">
TransitiveProperty</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#SymmetricProperty">
SymmetricProperty</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#FunctionalProperty">
FunctionalProperty</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#InverseFunctionalProperty">
InverseFunctionalProperty</a></i></li>
</ul>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="index" valign="top">
<b>Property Type Restrictions:</b>
<ul>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#allValuesFrom">
allValuesFrom</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#someValuesFrom">
someValuesFrom</a></i></li>
</ul>
<br />
<br />
<b>Class Intersection:</b>
<ul>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#intersectionOf">
intersectionOf</a></i></li>
</ul>
</td>
<td class="index" valign="top">
<b>Restricted Cardinality:</b>
<ul>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#minCardinality">
minCardinality</a></i> (only 0 or 1)</li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#maxCardinality">
maxCardinality</a></i> (only 0 or 1)</li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#Cardinality">
cardinality</a></i> (only 0 or 1)</li>
</ul>
<br />
<b><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s3.7">Datatypes</a></b>
</td>
<td class="index" valign="top">
<b>Header Information:</b>
<ul>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s3.8">imports</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s3.8">priorVersion</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s3.8">backwardCompatibleWith</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#s3.8">incompatibleWith</a></i></li>
</ul>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<h3><a id="s2.2" name="s2.2"></a>2.2 OWL DL and Full
Synopsis</h3>
<p>The list of OWL DL and OWL Full language constructs that are
in addition to those of OWL Lite is given below.</p>
<table cellspacing="30" width="100%">
<colgroup span="4" width="1">
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="index" valign="top">
<b>Class Axioms:</b>
<ul>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#oneOf">oneOf</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#disjointWith">
disjointWith</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#complexClassFull">
equivalentClass</a></i><br />
(applied to class expressions)</li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#complexClassFull">
rdfs:subClassOf</a></i><br />
(applied to class expressions)</li>
</ul>
</td>
<td class="index" valign="top">
<b>Boolean Combinations of Class Expressions:</b>
<ul>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#booleanFull">
unionOf</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#booleanFull">
intersectionOf</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#booleanFull">
complementOf</a></i></li>
</ul>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="index" valign="top">
<b>Arbitrary Cardinality:</b>
<ul>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#cardinalityFull">
minCardinality</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#cardinalityFull">
maxCardinality</a></i></li>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#cardinalityFull">
cardinality</a></i></li>
</ul>
</td>
<td class="index" valign="top">
<b>Filler Information:</b>
<ul>
<li><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#hasValue">hasValue</a></i></li>
</ul>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<h2><a id="s3" name="s3"></a>3. Language Description of OWL
Lite</h2>
<p>This section provides an informal description of the OWL
Lite language features. We do not discuss the specific syntax
of these features (see the <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/">OWL Reference</a> for
definitions). Each language feature is hyperlinked to the
appropriate place in the <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/">OWL
Guide</a> for more examples and guidance on usage.</p>
<p>OWL Lite uses only some of the OWL language features and has
has more limitations on the use of the features than OWL DL or
OWL Full. ... are also only allowed between named classes, ...
Similarly, restrictions In OWL Lite classes can only be defined
in terms of named superclasses (superclasses cannot be
arbitrary expressions), and only certain kinds of class
restrictions can be used. Equivalence between classes and
subclass relationships between classes are also only allowed
between named classes, and not between arbitrary class
expressions. Similarly, restrictions in OWL Lite use only named
classes. OWL Lite also has a limited notion of cardinality -
the only cardinalities allowed to be explicitly stated are 0 or
1.</p>
<h3><a id="s3.1" name="s3.1"></a>3.1 OWL Lite RDF Schema
Features</h3>
<!-- FvH: now obsolete because of term glossary in Guide
This document uses the term "individual"
to refer
to objects that belong to classes (e.g., the individual Deborah belongs to the
class Person) as well as to objects that are datatypes (e.g., the individual 4
is an integer).
-->
<p>The following OWL Lite features related to RDF Schema are
included.</p>
<ul>
<li><b><i><a id="Class" name="Class"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_Class">
Class</a></i></b>: A class defines a group of individuals
that belong together because they share some properties. For
example, Deborah and Frank are both members of the class
Person. Classes can be organized in a specialization
hierarchy using <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/"><i>SubClassOf</i></a>.
There is a built-in most general class named Thing that is
the class of all individuals and a superclass of all OWL
classes.</li>
<li><b><i><a id="subClassOf" name="subClassOf"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#rdfs_subClassOf">
rdfs:subClassOf</a></i></b>: Class hierarchies may be created
by making one or more statements that a class is a subclass
of another class. For example, the class Person could be
stated to be a subclass of the class Mammal. From this a
reasoner can deduce that if an individual is a Person, then
it is a Mammal.</li>
<li><b><i><a id="property" name="property"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#rdf_Property">
rdfs:Property</a></i></b>: Properties can be used to state
relationships between individuals or from individuals to data
values. Examples of properties include hasChild, hasRelative,
hasSibling, and hasAge. The first three can be used to relate
an instance of a class Person to another instance of the
class Person (and are thus ObjectProperties), and the last
(hasAge) can be used to relate an instance of the class
Person to an instance of the datatype Integer (and is thus a
Datatype property).</li>
<li><b><i><a id="subPropertyOf" name="subPropertyOf"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#rdfs_subPropertyOf">
rdfs:subPropertyOf</a></i></b>: Property hierarchies may be
created by making one or more statements that a property is a
subproperty of one or more other properties. For example,
hasSibling may be stated to be a subproperty of hasRelative.
From this a reasoner can deduce that if an individual is
related to another by the hasSibling property, then it is
also related to the other by the hasRelative property.</li>
<li><b><i><a id="domain" name="domain"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#term_domain">
rdfs:domain</a></i></b>: A domain of a property limits the
individuals to which the property can be applied. If a
property relates individual to another individual, and the
property has a class as one of its domains, then the
individual must belong to the class. For example, the
property hasChild may be stated to have the domain of Mammal.
From this a reasoner can deduce that if Frank hasChild Anna,
then Frank must be a Mammal. Note that <i>rdfs:domain</i> is
called a global restriction since the restriction is stated
on the property and not just on the property when it is
associated with a particular class. See the discussion below
on local restrictions for more information.</li>
<li><b><i><a id="range" name="range"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#term_range">
rdfs:range</a></i></b>: The range of a property limits the
individuals that the property may have as its value. If a
property relates an individual to another individual, and the
property has a class as its range, then the other indivual
must belong to the range class. For example, the property
hasChild may be stated to have the range of Mammal. From this
a reasoner can deduce that if Louise is related to Deborah by
the hasChild property, i.e., Deborah is the child of Louise,
then Deborah is a Mammal. Range is also a global restriction
as is domain above. Again, see the discussion below on local
restrictions (e.g. <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/">AllValuesFrom</a>)
for more information.</li>
<li><b><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#term_individual">
Individual</a><a id="Individual"
name="Individual"></a></i></b> : Individuals are instances of
classes, and properties may be used to relate one individual
to another. For example, an individual named Deborah may be
described as an instance of the class Person and the property
hasEmployer may be used to relate the individual Deborah to
the individual StanfordUniversity.</li>
</ul>
<h3><a id="s3.2" name="s3.2"></a>3.2 OWL Lite Equality and
Inequality</h3>
The following OWL Lite features are related to equality or
inequality.
<ul>
<li><b><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_equivalentClass">
equivalentClass</a><a id="equivalentClass"
name="equivalentClass"></a></i></b> : Two classes may be
stated to be equivalent. Equivalent classes have the same
instances. Equality can be used to create synonymous classes.
For example, Car can be stated to be <i>equivalentClass</i>
to Automobile. From this a reasoner can deduce that any
individual that is an instance of Car is also an instance of
Automobile and vice versa.</li>
<li><b><i><a id="equivalentProperty"
name="equivalentProperty"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_equivalentProperty">
equivalentProperty</a></i></b>: Two properties may be stated
to be equivalent. Equivalent properties relate one individual
to the same set of other individuals. Equality may be used to
create synonymous properties. For example, hasLeader may be
stated to be the <i>equivalentProperty</i> to hasHead. From
this a reasoner can deduce that if X is related to Y by the
property hasLeader, X is also related to Y by the property
hasHead and vice versa. A reasoner can also deduce that
hasLeader is a subproperty of hasHead and hasHead is a
subProperty of hasLeader.</li>
<li><b><i><a id="sameIndividualAs"
name="sameIndividualAs"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_sameIndividualAs">
sameIndividualAs</a></i></b>: Two individuals may be stated
to be the same. This construct may be used to create a number
of different names that refer to the same individual. For
example, the individual Deborah may be stated to be the same
individual as DeborahMcGuinness.</li>
<li><b><i><a id="differentFrom" name="differentFrom"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#differentFrom">
differentFrom</a></i></b>: An individual may be stated to be
different from other individuals. For example, the individual
Frank may be stated to be different from the individuals
Deborah and Jim. Thus, if the individuals Frank and Deborah
are both values for a property that is stated to be
functional (thus the property has at most one value), then
there is a contradiction. Explicitly stating that individuals
are different can be important in when using languages such
as OWL (and RDF) that do not assume that individuals have one
and only one name. For example, with no additional
information, a reasoner will not deduce that Frank and
Deborah refer to distinct individuals.</li>
<li><b><i><a id="allDifferent" name="allDifferent"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_AllDifferent">
allDifferent</a></i></b>: A number of individuals may be
stated to be mutually distinct in one allDifferent statement.
For example, Frank, Deborah, and Jim could be stated to be
mutually distinct using the allDifferent construct. Unlike
the differentFrom statement above, this would also enforce
that Jim and Deborah are distinct (not just that Frank is
distinct from Deborah and Frank is distinct from Jim). The
allDifferent construct is particularly useful when there are
sets of distinct objects and when modelers are interested in
enforcing the unique names assumption within those sets of
objects.</li>
</ul>
<h3><a id="s3.3" name="s3.3"></a>3.3 OWL Lite Property
Characteristics</h3>
There are special identifiers in OWL Lite that are used to
provide information concerning properties and their values.
<ul>
<li><b><i><a id="inverseOf" name="inverseOf"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_inverseOf">
inverseOf</a></i></b>: One property may be stated to be the
inverse of another property. If the property P1 is stated to
be the inverse of the property P2, then if X is related to Y
by the P2 property, then Y is related to X by the P1
property. For example, if hasChild is the inverse of
hasParent and Deborah hasParent Louise, then a reasoner can
deduce that Louise hasChild Deborah.</li>
<li><b><i><a id="TransitiveProperty"
name="TransitiveProperty"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_TransitiveProperty">
TransitiveProperty</a></i></b>: Properties may be stated to
be transitive. If a property is transitive, then if the pair
(x,y) is an instance of the transitive property P, and the
pair (y,z) is an instance of P, then the pair (x,z) is also
an instance of P. For example, if ancestor is stated to be
transitive, and if Sara is an ancestor of Louise (i.e.,
(Sara,Louise) is an instance of the property ancestor) and
Louise is an ancestor of Deborah (i.e., (Louise,Deborah) is
an instance of the property ancestor), then a reasoner can
deduce that Sara is an ancestor of Deborah (i.e.,
(Sara,Deborah) is an instance of the property
ancestor).<br />
OWL Lite (and OWL DL) impose the side condition that
transitive properties (and their superproperties) cannot have
a maxCardinality 1 restriction. Without this side-condition,
OWL Lite and OWL DL would become undecidable languages. See
the property axiom section of the <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-absyn/">OWL Abstract Syntax
and Semantics</a> document for more information.</li>
<li><b><i><a id="SymmetricProperty"
name="SymmetricProperty"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_SymmetricProperty">
SymmetricProperty</a></i></b>: Properties may be stated to be
symmetric. If a property is symmetric, then if the pair (x,y)
is an instance of the symmetric property P, then the pair
(y,x) is also an instance of P. For example, friend may be
stated to be a symmetric property. Then a reasoner that is
given that Frank is a friend of Deborah can deduce that
Deborah is a friend of Frank. Note that properties that are
to be made symmetric may not have arbitrary domains and
ranges.</li>
<li><b><i><a id="FunctionalProperty"
name="FunctionalProperty"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_FunctionalProperty">
FunctionalProperty</a></i></b> : Properties may be stated to
have a unique value. If a property is a FunctionalProperty,
then it has no more than one value for each individual (it
may have no values for an individual). This characteristic
has been referred to as having a unique property.
FunctionalProperty is shorthand for stating that the
property's minimum cardinality is zero and its maximum
cardinality is 1. For example, hasPrimaryEmployer may be
stated to be a FunctionalProperty. From this a reasoner may
deduce that no individual may have more than one primary
employer. This does not imply that every Person must have at
least one primary employer however.</li>
<li><b><i><a id="InverseFunctionalProperty"
name="InverseFunctionalProperty"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_InverseFunctionalProperty">
InverseFunctionalProperty</a></i></b>: Properties may be
stated to be inverse functional. If a property is inverse
functional then the inverse of the property is functional.
Thus the inverse of the property has at most one value for
each individual. This characteristic has also been referred
to as an unambiguous property. For example,
hasUSSocialSecurityNumber (a unique identifier for United
States residents) may be stated to be inverse functional (or
unambiguous). The inverse of this property (which may be
referred to as isTheSocialSecurityNumberFor) has at most one
value for any individual in the class of social security
numbers. Thus any one person's social security number is the
only value for their isTheSocialSecurityNumberfor property.
From this a reasoner can deduce that no two different
individual instances of Person have the identical US Social
Security Number. Also, a reasoner can deduce that if two
instances of Person have the same social security number,
then those two instances refer to the same individual.</li>
</ul>
<h3><a id="s3.4" name="s3.4"></a>3.4 OWL Lite Property Type
Restriction</h3>
OWL Lite allows restrictions to be placed on how properties can
be used by instances of a class. The following two restrictions
limit which values can be used while the next section's
restrictions limit how many values can be used.
<ul>
<li><b><i><a id="allValuesFrom" name="allValuesFrom"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_allValuesFrom">
allValuesFrom</a></i></b>: The restriction allValuesFrom is
stated on a property with respect to a class. It means that
this property on this particular class has a local range
restriction associated with it. Thus if an instance of the
class is related by the property to a second individual, then
the second individual can be inferred to be an instance of
the local range restriction class. For example, the class
Person may have a property called hasOffspring restricted to
have allValuesFrom the class Person. This means that if an
individual person Louise is related by the property
hasOffspring to the individual Deborah, then from this a
reasoner can deduce that Deborah is an instance of the class
Person. This restriction allows the property hasOffspring to
be used with other classes, such as the class Cat, and have
an appropriate value restriction associated with the use of
the property on that class. In this case, hasOffspring would
have the local range restriction of Cat when associated with
the class Cat and would have the local range restriction
Person when associated with the class Person. Note that a
reasoner can not deduce from an allValuesFrom restriction
alone that there actually is at least one value for the
property.</li>
<li><b><i><a id="someValuesFrom" name="someValuesFrom"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_someValuesFrom">
someValuesFrom</a></i></b>: The restriction
<i>someValuesFrom</i> is stated on a property with respect to
a class. A particular class may have a restriction on a
property that at least one value for that property is of a
certain type. For example, the class SemanticWebPaper may
have a <i>someValuesFrom</i> restriction on the hasKeyword
property that states that <u>some</u> value for the
hasKeyword property should be an instance of the class
SemanticWebTopic. This allows for the option of having
multiple keywords and as long as one or more is an instance
of the class SemanticWebTopic, then the paper would be
consistent with the <i>someValuesFrom</i> restriction. Unlike
<i>allValuesFrom</i>, <i>someValuesFrom</i> does not restrict
all the values of the property to be instances of the same
class. If myPaper is an instance of the SemanticWebPaper
class, then myPaper is related by the <i>hasKeyword</i>
property to at least one instance of the SemanticWebTopic
class. Note that a reasoner can not deduce (as it could with
<i>allValuesFrom</i> restrictions) that <u>all</u> values of
hasKeyword are instances of the SemanticWebTopic class</li>
</ul>
<h3><a id="s3.5" name="s3.5"></a>3.5 OWL Lite Restricted
Cardinality</h3>
<p>OWL Lite includes a limited form of cardinality
restrictions. OWL (and OWL Lite) cardinality restrictions are
referred to as local restrictions, since they are stated on
properties with respect to a particular class. That is, the
restrictions constrain the cardinality of that property on
instances of that class. OWL Lite cardinality restrictions are
limited because they only allow statements concerning
cardinalities of value 0 or 1 (they do not allow arbitrary
values for cardinality, as is the case in OWL DL and OWL
Full).</p>
<ul>
<li><b><i><a id="minCardinality" name="minCardinality"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_minCardinality">
minCardinality</a></i></b>: Cardinality is stated on a
property with respect to a particular class. If a
<i>minCardinality</i> of 1 is stated on a property with
respect to a class, then any instance of that class will be
related to at least one individual by that property. This
restriction is another way of saying that the property is
<u>required</u> to have a value for all instances of the
class. For example, the class Person would not have any
minimum cardinality restrictions stated on a hasOffspring
property since not all persons have offspring. The class
Parent, however would have a minimum cardinality of 1 on the
hasOffspring property. If a reasoner knows that Louise is a
Person, then nothing can be deduced about a minimum
cardinality for her hasOffspring property. Once it is
discovered that Louise is an instance of Parent, then a
reasoner can deduce that Louise is related to at least one
individual by the hasOffspring property. From this
information alone, a reasoner can not deduce any maximum
number of offspring for individual instances of the class
parent. In OWL Lite the only minimum cardinalities allowed
are 0 or 1. A minimum cardinality of zero on a property just
states (in the absence of any more specific information) that
the property is optional with respect to a class. For
example, the property has Offspring may have a minimum
cardinality of zero on the class Person (while it is stated
to have the more specific information of minimum cardinality
of one on the class Parent).</li>
<li><b><i><a id="maxCardinality" name="maxCardinality"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_maxCardinality">
maxCardinality</a></i></b>: Cardinality is stated on a
property with respect to a particular class. If a
<i>maxCardinality</i> of 1 is stated on a property with
respect to a class, then any instance of that class will be
related to at most one individual by that property. A
maxCardinality 1 restriction is sometimes called a functional
or unique property. For example, the property
hasRegisteredVotingState on the class UnitedStatesCitizens
may have a maximum cardinality of one (because people are
only allowed to vote in only one state). From this a reasoner
can deduce that individual instances of the class USCitizens
may not be related to two or more distinct individuals
through the hasRegisteredVotingState property. From a maximum
cardinality one restriction alone, a reasoner can not deduce
a minimum cardinality of 1. It may be useful to state that
certain classes have no values for a particular property. For
example, instances of the class UnmarriedPerson should not be
related to <u>any</u> individuals by the property hasSpouse.
This situation is represented by a maximum cardinality of
zero on the hasSpouse property on the class
UnmarriedPerson.</li>
<li><b><i><a id="Cardinality" name="Cardinality"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_cardinality">
cardinality</a></i></b>: Cardinality is provided as a
convenience when it is useful to state that a property on a
class has both <i>minCardinality</i> 0 and
<i>maxCardinality</i> 0 or both <i>minCardinality</i> 1 and
<i>maxCardinality</i> 1. For example, the class Person has
exactly one value for the property hasBirthMother. From this
a reasoner can deduce that no two distinct individual
instances of the class Mother may be values for the
hasBirthMother property of the same person.</li>
</ul>
Alternate namings for these restricted forms of cardinality
were discussed. Current recommendations are to include any such
names in a front end system. More on this topic is available on
the publically available webont mail archives with the most
relevant message at <a
href="http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Oct/0063.html">
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Oct/0063.html</a>.
<h3><a id="s3.6" name="s3.6"></a>3.6 OWL Lite Class
Intersection</h3>
OWL Lite has contains an intersection constructor but limits
its usage. <!--(OWL full does not place limitations
on the use of boolean constructors such as intersection.)
-->
<ul>
<li><b><i><a id="intersectionOf" name="intersectionOf"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_intersectionOf">
intersectionOf</a></i></b>: OWL Lite allows intersections of
named classes and restrictions. For example, the class
EmployedPerson can be described as the <i>intersectionOf</i>
Person and EmployedThings (which could be defined as things
that have a minimum cardinality of 1 on the hasEmployer
property). From this a reasoner may deduce that any
particular EmployedPerson has at least one employer.
<!-- OWL Lite requires <i>intersectionOf</i> to take named
classes thus it would not be allowed in OWL Lite to
describe EmployedPerson as the intersection of Person
and the unnamed the class of things that have at
least one employer and is simultaneously an instance
of the class Person.
The ability to use unnamed classes is introduced in
OWL DL and OWL Full.
--></li>
</ul>
<h3><a id="s3.7" name="s3.7"></a>3.7 Datatypes</h3>
<p>OWL uses the RDF mechanisms for data values.
<!-- dlm: removed with suggestion from pfps. too much detail.
datatyping scheme, which provides a mechanism for referring to pointer
href="http://www.daml.org/2002/06/webont/owl-ref-proposed#ref-xml-schema2">XML
Schema datatypes</A>. Such XML Schema datatypes are identified by a URI, and
each time an instance of such a datatype occurs, it must have an RDF attribute
rdf:datatype whose value should be the URI reference of the XML Schema datatype.
-->See the <a
href="http://www.daml.org/2002/06/webont/owl-ref-proposed#rdf-datatype">
OWL Guide</a> for a more detailed description.</p>
<h3><a id="s3.8" name="s3.8"></a>3.8 OWL Lite Header
Information</h3>
OWL Lite supports notions of ontology inclusion and
relationships and attaching information to ontologies.
<!-- dlm: removed specificity of section previously included
OWL supports
standard notions of ontology referencing, inclusion, and meta-information. All
three levels of OWL include ways of specifying ontologies to import, ontology
version information, prior ontology version information, ontologies known to be
backward compatible, and ontologies known to be incompatible.
-->
See the <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#">OWL
Reference</a> for details and the <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/">OWL Guide</a> for
examples.
<h2><a id="s4" name="s4"></a>4. Incremental Language
Description of OWL DL and OWL FULL</h2>
Both OWL DL and OWL Full use the same vocabulary although OWL
DL is subject to some restrictions. Roughly, OWL DL requires
type separation (a class can not also be an individual or
property, a property can not also be an individual or class).
This implies that restrictions cannot be applied to the
language elements of OWL itself (something that is allowed in
OWL Full). Furthermore, OWL DL requires that properties are
either ObjectProperties or DatatypeProperties:
DatatypeProperties are relations between instances of classes
and RDF literals and XML Schema datatypes, while
ObjectProperties are relations between instances of two
classes. The <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-absyn/">OWL
Abstract Syntax and Semantics</a> document explains the
distinctions and limitations. We describe the OWL DL and OWL
Full vocabulary that extends the constructions of OWL Lite
below.
<ul>
<li><b><i><a id="oneOf" name="oneOf"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_oneOf">
oneOf</a></i></b>: (enumerated classes): Classes can be
described by enumeration of the individuals that make up the
class. The members of the class are exactly the set of
enumerated individuals; no more, no less. For example, the
class of daysOfTheWeek can be described by simply enumerating
the individuals Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday,
Friday, Saturday. From this a reasoner can deduce the maximum
cardinality (7) of any property that has daysOfTheWeek as its
allValuesFrom restriction.</li>
<li><b><i><a id="hasValue" name="hasValue"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_hasValue">
hasValue</a></i></b>: (property values): A property can be
required to have a certain individual as a value (also
sometimes referred to as property values). For example,
instances of the class of dutchCitizens can be characterized
as those people that have theNetherlands as a value of their
nationality. (TheNetherlands itself is an instance of the
class of Nationalities).</li>
<li><b><i><a id="disjointWith" name="disjointWith"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_disjointWith">
disjointWith</a></i></b>: OWL Full allows the statement that
classes are disjoint. For example, Man and Woman can be
stated to be disjoint classes. From this disjointWith
statement, a reasoner can deduce an inconsistency when an
individual is stated to be an instance of both and similarly
a reasoner can deduce that if A is an instance of Man, then A
is <i>not</i> an instance of Woman.</li>
<li><b><i><a id="booleanFull" name="booleanFull"></a><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_unionOf">
unionOf, complementOf, intersectionOf</a></i></b> (Boolean
combinations): OWL allows arbitrary Boolean combinations of
classes and restrictions: unionOf, complementOf, and
intersectionOf. For example, using unionOf, we can state that
a class contains things that are either USCitizens or
DutchCitizens. Using complementOf, we could state that
children are <i>not</i> SeniorCitizens. (i.e. the class
Children is a subclass of the complement of SeniorCitizens).
Citizenship of the European Union could be described as the
union of the citizenship of all member states.</li>
<li><b><i><a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/#owl_cardinality">
minCardinality, maxCardinality, cardinality</a><a
id="cardinalityFull" name="cardinalityFull"></a></i></b>
(full cardinality): While in OWL Lite, cardinalities are
restricted to at least, at most or exactly 1 or 0, full OWL
allows cardinality statements for arbitrary non-negative
integers. For example the class of DINKs ("Dual Income, No
Kids") would restrict the cardinality of the property
hasIncome to a minimum cardinality of two (while the property
hasChild would have be restricted to cardinality 0).</li>
<li><b><i><a id="complexClassFull"
name="complexClassFull">complex classes</a></i></b> : In many
constructs, OWL Lite restricts the syntax to single class
names (e.g. in subClassOf or equivalentClass statements). OWL
Full extends this restriction to allow arbitrarily complex
class descriptions, consisting of enumerated classes,
property restrictions, and Boolean combinations. OWL also
includes a special "bottom" class with the name Nothing that
is the class that has no instances. Also, OWL full allows
classes to be used as instances (and OWL DL and OWL Lite do
not). For more on this topic, see the "Design for Use"
section of the Guide document.</li>
</ul>
<h2><a id="s5" name="s5">5. Summary</a></h2>
This document provides an overview of the Web Ontology Language
by providing a brief introduction to why one might need a Web
ontology language and how OWL fits in with related W3C
languages. It also provides a brief description of the three
OWL sublanguages: OWL Lite, OWL DL, and OWL Full along with a
feature synopsis for each of the languages. This document is an
update to the Feature Synopsis Document. It provides simple
descriptions of the constructs along with simple examples. It
references the <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/">OWL
reference document</a>, the <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030210/">OWL
Guide</a>, and the <a
href="http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-absyn/">OWL Abstract Syntax and
Semantics</a> document for more details. Previous versions (<a
href="http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLFeatureSynopsisJan22003.htm">
January 2, 2003</a>, <a
href="http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLFeatureSynopsisJuly29.htm">
July 29, 2002</a>, <a
href="http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLFeatureSynopsisJuly8.htm">
July 8, 2002</a>, <a
href="http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLFeatureSynopsisJune23.htm">
June 23, 2002</a>, <a
href="http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/complianceMay262002.html">
May 26, 2002</a>, and <a
href="http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/complianceMay152002.html">
May 15, 2002</a>) of this document provide the historical view
of the evolution of OWL Lite and the issues discussed in its
evolution.
<h2><a id="s6" name="s6">Acknowledgements</a></h2>
This document is the result of extensive discussions within the
Web Ontology Working Group as a whole. The members of this
working group were Jean-François Baget, James Barnette,
Sean Bechhofer, Jonathan Borden, Frederik Brysse, Stephen
Buswell, Peter Crowther, Jos De Roo, David De Roure, Mike Dean,
Larry Eshelman, Jérôme Euzenat, Dieter Fensel, Tim
Finin, Nicholas Gibbins, Pat Hayes, Jeff Heflin, Ziv Hellman,
James Hendler, Bernard Horan, Masahiro Hori, Ian Horrocks,
Francesco Iannuzzelli, Mario Jeckle, Ruediger Klein, Ora
Lassila, Alexander Maedche, Massimo Marchiori, Deborah
McGuinness, Libby Miller, Enrico Motta, Leo Obrst, Laurent
Olivry , Peter Patel-Schneider, Martin Pike, Marwan Sabbouh,
Guus Schreiber, Noboru Shimizu, Michael Sintek, Michael Smith,
Ned Smith, John Stanton, Lynn Andrea Stein, Herman ter Horst,
Lynne R. Thompson, David Trastour, Frank van Harmelen, Raphael
Volz, Evan Wallace, Christopher Welty, and John Yanosy.
</body>
</html>