THIS SLIDE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

1
THIS SLIDE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2
DAMLOIL Schema Parameter Interface Format
I H M C
DAMLOIL has no natural role for variables, and
no variable binders. This may well be seen as an
advantage (subclass A B) ltgt (forall
(?x)(implies (A ?x)(B ?x))) P is restriction of
Q on R to S ltgt (forall (?x) (iff (P ?x)(and
(Q ?x)(exists (?y)(and (R ?x ?y) (S ?y))))))
3
DAMLOIL Schema Parameter Interface Format
I H M C
However, many uses of, and likely future
extensions to, DAMLOIL require the use of
variables to allow pattern-matching 1. allowing
external software to bind values to parameters
(CoABS policy tool DAML-S applications) 2.
syntax for atomic component of 'rules' and
queries 3. controlling use of URL's across
networks (as in HORUS)
4
DAMLOIL Schema Parameter Interface Format
I H M C
Changing DAML to include variables raises a host
of semantic issues which we propose to completely
avoid. This is a purely syntactic proposal. No
semantics is provided for the variables until
they have been completely instantiated. In
logical terms, these are schematic (not
quantified) variables in programming language
terms, they are macros. To avoid confusion we
call them parameters. DAMLOIL distinguishes
two kinds of 'name' URIs and literals. The
proposal is an extended notation in which URI's
may be replaced by URI parameters and literals by
literal parameters.
5
DAMLOIL Schema Parameter Interface Format
I H M C
Uri-parameter ?word / Literal-parameter
??word / word lt gt ? / space ltOr some
other syntax would dogt A URI literal term is
either a URI literal or a URI literal
parameter. A substitution is a sequence of
substitution pairs consisting of a URI literal
parameter and a URI literal term.
6
DAMLOIL Schema Parameter Interface Format
ltdamlClass rdfID?actionType/ gt
ltrdfslabelgt?actionType/lt/rdfslabelgt
ltrdfssubClassOf rdfresource"Ordinary
Action"/gt ltrdfssubClassOfgt
ltdamlRestriction damlCardinality"1gt
ltdamlonProperty rdfresource"performedBy"/gt
ltdamltoClass rdfresource"?performer/
"/gt lt/damlRestrictiongt
lt/rdfssubClassOfgt lt/damlClassgt
I H M C
7
DAMLOIL Schema Parameter Interface Format
ltdamlClass rdfID?actionType/ gt
ltrdfslabelgt?actionType/lt/rdfslabelgt
ltrdfssubClassOf rdfresource"Ordinary
Action"/gt ltrdfssubClassOfgt
ltdamlRestriction damlCardinality"1gt
ltdamlonProperty rdfresource"performedBy"/gt
ltdamltoClass rdfresource?performer/
"/gt lt/damlRestrictiongt
lt/rdfssubClassOfgt lt/damlClassgt ?actionType/
DelegateAction ?performer/ Domain_Manager ?act
ionType/ Multi_Actor_Action ?performer/
ActorGroup
I H M C
8
A more compact notation (with Frank v. Harmelen)
ltrdfsClass rdfID"elephant"gt
ltrdfssubClassOfgt ltrdfsClass
rdfabout"animal"/gt lt/rdfssubClassOfgt
ltrdfssubClassOfgt ltdamlRestrictiongt
ltdamlonProperty rdfresource"eats"/gt
ltdamltoClassgt ltrdfsClass
rdfabout"plant"/gt lt/damltoClassgt
lt/damlRestrictiongt lt/rdfssubClassOfgt
ltrdfssubClassOfgt ltdamlRestrictiongt
ltdamlonProperty rdfresource"colour"/gt
ltdamlhasValuegt ltdamlConcreteTypeExpressi
ongtEQUAL grey'' lt/damlConcreteTypeExpre
ssiongt lt/damlhasValuegt
lt/damlRestrictiongt lt/rdfssubClassOfgt lt/rdfsCl
assgt
I H M C
Class elephant SubClassOf animal which eats
plant which color EQUAL grey
9
A more compact notation (with Frank v. Harmelen)
I H M C
ltrdfsClass rdfID"herbivore"gt
ltdamlintersectionOfgt ltrdfsClass
rdfabout"animal"/gt ltdamlRestrictiongt
ltdamlonProperty rdfresource"eats"/gt
ltdamltoClassgt ltrdfsClassgt ltdamlunionOfgt
ltrdfsClass rdfabout"plant"/gt
ltdamlRestrictiongt ltdamlonProperty
rdfresource"is_part_of"/gt
ltdamlhasValuegt ltrdfsClass rdfabout"plant"/gt
lt/damlhasValuegt lt/damlRestrictiongt
lt/damlunionOfgt lt/rdfsClassgt
lt/damltoClassgt lt/damlRestrictiongt
lt/damlintersectionOfgt lt/rdfsClassgt
Class herbivore IntersectionOf animal which
eats UnionOf plant which is_part_of hasValue
plant
10
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C
A brief essay inspired by conversations with
Lynn Stein Bill Andersen Jim Hendler Adam
Pease Jerry Hobbs and others too numerous to
mention
11
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C
ltrdfRDF xmlnsrdf http//www.w3.org/1999/02/22
-rdf-syntax-ns xmlnsa http//someplace.org/th
is_ontology xmlnsbhttp//some_other_place.gov
/that_ontology ltdamlClass rdfIDBarble"gt ltrdf
ssubClassOfgt ltdamlRestrictiongt
ltdamlonProperty rdfresourceafoodle"/gt
ltdamltoClass rdfresourcebbazset"/gt
lt/damlRestrictiongt lt/rdfssubClassOfgt lt/damlCl
assgt
12
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C
If I use a term from your ontology, how much of
your ontology am I assuming?
13
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C
If I use a term from your ontology, how much of
your ontology am I assuming? A1 Only the parts
that I explicitly endorse or include
14
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C
If I use a term from your ontology, how much of
your ontology am I assuming? A1 Only the parts
that I explicitly endorse or include A2 Enough
to establish the intended meaning of the term
15
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C
If I use a term from your ontology, how much of
your ontology am I assuming? A1 Only the parts
that I explicitly endorse or include A2 Enough
to establish the intended meaning of the term A3
All of it
16
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C
If I use a term from your ontology, how much of
your ontology am I assuming? A1 Only the parts
that I explicitly endorse or include A2 Enough
to establish the intended meaning of the term A3
All of it A4 None of it
17
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C
If I use a term from your ontology, how much of
your ontology am I assuming? Wrong answer The
question doesnt arise since we are all basically
part of One World Wide Ontology
18
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C

• OK, at least we are using the same notation,
  which is a good start.

19
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C

• OK, at least we are using the same notation,
  which is a good start.
• BUT if you are using a closed world assumption
  and I am not, we will misunderstand one another.

20
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C

• OK, at least we are using the same notation,
  which is a good start.
• BUT

21
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C

• You say
• Employees are a subclass of persons
• I say
• Employment is a property some people have

22
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C

• You say
• Things are physical objects
• I say
• Things include ideas, integers, intentions,
  states of mind, The Grinch

23
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C

• You say
• Things are physical objects
• I say
• Things include ideas, integers, intentions,
  states of mind, The Grinch, fluents, tropes,
  eventualities, ways of being, possible worlds,
  whatever

24
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C

• You say
• Things are physical objects
• I say
• Things are physical objects

25
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C

• You say
• Things are physical objects
• I say
• Things are physical objects
• BUT
• You say
• Physical objects retain their identity
  through time and change their properties
• I say
• Physical objects have temporal parts which
  have timeless properties

26
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C

• You say
• Things are physical objects
• I say
• Things are physical objects
• BUT
• You say
• Physical objects retain their identity
  through time and change their properties
• I say
• Physical objects have temporal parts which
  have timeless properties

27
Describing events/actions/processes/occurrents/hap
penings Things changeso need to make assertions
relative to times TrickleDown push temporal
parameters as deep into the expression as they
need to go (but no further). R(a,b,c)
T R(a,b,c),T simple proposition true at time
R,T(a,b,c) time-indexed relation (eg
position) R(a,b,c,T) time-relative assertion
R(a,T,b,c,T) dynamic entities
Often most natural language for humans
Corresponds to linguistic analyses
Often most effective for action planning
Often most effective for automatic reasoning
about complex domain
28
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C

• You say
• holes are physical things, and holes can only
  be whole
• I say
• holes are spatio-temporal but not physical,
  and can have parts
• He says
• holes arent physical, but are necessarily
  located in physical things and cannot have parts
• And he says
• holes dont exist as entities, but are
  locations which are empty.

29
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C

• Which ontology should be chosen/adopted/made into
  the standard?

30
Collide !
When Ontologies
I H M C

• Which ontology should be chosen/adopted/made into
  the standard?
• WRONG QUESTION !
• All these viewpoints have their uses, are
  internally coherent and are legitimate points of
  view. There is no single best answer.

31
Collide
When Ontologies
I H M C
we need

• Long Term
• Ways to broker meanings between different
  ontological perspectives (translation techniques,
  known safe routes, neutral ontological
  territory.)
• Medium Term
• Ways to SAY what parts of one ontology are being
  included into another, and to analyze the
  consequences.
• Short Term
• Agree that there is a problem to be solved.
  LUNCH