A possible simplification of the semantic web architecture

ABSTRACT

In the semantic Web architecture, Web ontology languages arebuilt on top of RDF(S). However, serious difficulties have arisen when trying to layer expressive ontology languages, like OWL, on top of RDF-Schema. Although these problems can be avoided, OWL (andthe whole semantic Web architecture) becomes much more complex than it should be. In this paper, a possible simplification of thesemantic Web architecture is suggested, which has several import antadvantages with respect to the layering currently accepted by the W3C Ontology Working Group.

REFERENCES

• 1: F. Baader, I. Horrocks, and U. Sattler. Description logics as ontology languages for the semantic Web. In D. Hutter and W. Stephan, editors, Festschrift in honor of Jorg Siekmann, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Springer-Verlag, 2003.
• 2: Franz Baader , Werner Nutt, Basic description logics, The description logic handbook: theory, implementation, and applications, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 2003
• 3: T. Berners-Lee, J. Hendler, and O. Lassila. The semantic web. Scientific American, 2001.
• 4: D. Brickley and R. V. Guha. Resource description framework (rdf) schema specification 1.0: Rdf schema. W3C Working Draft, 2003.
• 5: Benjamin N. Grosof , Ian Horrocks , Raphael Volz , Stefan Decker, Description logic programs: combining logic programs with description logic, Proceedings of the 12th international conference on World Wide Web, May 20-24, 2003, Budapest, Hungary [doi>10.1145/775152.775160]
• 6: P. Hayes. Resource description framework (rdf) semantics. W3C Working Draft, 2003.
• 7: P. Hayes and C. Menzel. A semantics for the knowledge interchange format. In Proc. of IJCAI 2001 Workshop on the IEEE Upper Ontology, 2001.
• 8: I. Horrocks and P. F. Patel-Schneider. Reducing OWL entailment to description logic satisfiability. In Proc. of the 2003 Description Logic Workshop (DL 2003), 2003.
• 9: Ian Horrocks , Peter F. Patel-Schneider, Three theses of representation in the semantic web, Proceedings of the 12th international conference on World Wide Web, May 20-24, 2003, Budapest, Hungary [doi>10.1145/775152.775159]
• 10: I. Horrocks, P. F. Patel-Schneider, and F. V. Harmelen. From SHIQ and RDF to OWL: The making of a web ontology language. Journal of Web Semantics, 2003.
• 11: G. Klyne and J. J. Carroll. Resource description framework (rdf) concepts and abstract syntax. W3C Working Draft, 2003.
• 12: Daniele Nardi , Ronald J. Brachman, An introduction to description logics, The description logic handbook: theory, implementation, and applications, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 2003
• 13: J. Z. Pan and I. Horrocks. Metamodelling architecture of web ontology languages. In Proc. of the 2001 Semantic Web Working Symposium (SWWS), 2001.
• 14: J. Z. Pan and I. Horrocks. RDFS(FA): A DL-ised sub-language of RDFS. In Proc. of the 2003 Description Logic Workshop (DL 2003), 2003.
• 15: J. Z. Pan and I. Horrocks. RDFS(FA) and RDF MT: Two semantics for RDFS. In Proc. of the 2003 International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2003), 2003.
• 16: P. F. Patel-Schneider, P. Hayes, and I. Horrocks. (editors). Owl web ontology language semantics and abstract syntax. W3C Candidate Recommendation, 2003. Work in progress.
• 17: Peter F. Patel-Schneider , Dieter Fensel, Layering the Semantic Web: Problems and Directions, Proceedings of the First International Semantic Web Conference on The Semantic Web, p.16-29, June 09-12, 2002

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  I. Computing Methodologies
  I.2 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
      I.2.4 Knowledge Representation Formalisms and Methods
          Subjects: Representation languages

Additional Classification:
  F. Theory of Computation
  F.4 MATHEMATICAL LOGIC AND FORMAL LANGUAGES
      F.4.1 Mathematical Logic
          Subjects: Model theory

General Terms:
Languages

Keywords:
description logics, ontology web language (OWL), resource description framework (RDF), resource description framework schema (RDF-schema), semantic web