- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2009 20:31:00 +0100
- To: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <5AF21A62-D30D-49D8-8B0A-E575140AB5AA@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
On 5 Apr 2009, at 20:15, paola.dimaio@gmail.com wrote: > Thanks John, > > will check it out and send additional questions > > also Leo for the clarification about wsml and wsmo > I have only had the chance to read a couple of pieces of literature, > and have not gotten my head around capturing > how owl maps to wsmo, if at all, and if no, how come so OWL is a language. WSMO is not a language. WSMO is an ontology expressed in an ontology language. That ontology language isn't OWL, but, IIRC, WSML. OWL-S is an ontology, expressed in OWL which covers, roughly, the same domain as WSMO. Thus OWL is to OWL-S what WSML is to WSMO. WSML was developed because the WSMO developers thought that OWL lacked (or had the wrong version of) features they wanted for expressing WSMO. WSML is mostly rule oriented, though, IIRC, the WSML docs say something about incorporating OWL theories. Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Sunday, 5 April 2009 19:31:37 UTC