OWL Web本体语言概述 推荐标准
TransWiki - an Open Translation Project(OTP)
| 译文 | OWL Web本体语言概述 推荐标准http://www.transwiki.org/cn/owloverview.htm (http://www.transwiki.org/cn/owloverview.htm) |
| 原文 | OWL Overview Recommendation（http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/ (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/)） |
| 说明 |
http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-documents.html Reserved. W3C liability, trademark, document use and software licensing rules apply.
|
| 译者 | |
| 校对 | |
|
致谢 感谢所有关注本次翻译活动和给与帮助的朋友，并感谢由W3CHINA.ORG (http://www.w3china.org/)主办的开放翻译计划（OTP） (http://wiki.w3china.org/)为本次翻译计划提供翻译与讨论平台。 |
|
(http://www.w3.org/)
OWL Web本体语言概述
W3C推荐标准2004年2月10日
当前版本:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/ (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/)
最新版本:
http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/ (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/)
上一版本:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/PR-owl-features-20031215/ (http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/PR-owl-features-20031215/)
编者:
Deborah L. McGuinness (Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University) 
Frank van Harmelen (Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam) Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl
Please refer to the errata for this document, which may include some normative corrections.
请参考本文的勘误表,那里会有一些规范性的修正.
See also translations (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/translation/owl-features).
也可以查看相关翻译 (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/translation/owl-features).
Copyright (http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice#Copyright) ©right; 2004 W3C® (MIT, ERCIM, Keio (http://www.keio.ac.jp/)), All Rights Reserved. W3C liability (http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice#Legal_Disclaimer), trademark (http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice#W3C_Trademarks), document use (http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-documents) and software licensing (http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-software) rules apply.
Abstract
摘要
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 interpretability of Web content than that supported by XML, RDF, and RDF Schema (RDF-S) by providing additional vocabulary along with a formal semantics. OWL has three increasingly-expressive sublanguages: OWL Lite, OWL DL, and OWL Full.
OWL Web本体语言被设计用于那些处理信息的内容、而不是仅向人类呈现信息的应用。OWL通过提供更多具有形式语义的词汇，使之在Web内容的机器可理解性方面要强于XML、RDF和RDF Schema（RDF-S）等所能达到的程度。OWL有三个表达能力递增的子语言：OWL Lite， OWL DL，和OWL Full。
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 RDF Schema (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#ref-rdf-schema) is useful for understanding this document, but not essential. After this document, interested readers may turn to the OWL Guide (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/) for more detailed descriptions and extensive examples on the features of OWL. The normative formal definition of OWL can be found in the OWL Semantics and Abstract Syntax (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/).
本文档适合对OWL的表达能力需要一个初步了解的读者。本文给出了关于OWL各子语言特征的非形式化描述。了解一些RDF Schema (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#ref-rdf-schema)的知识对于理解本文档会有帮助，但这不是必需的。读过本文档后，感兴趣的读者可以继续阅读OWL指南 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/)，以了解关于更多OWL特征的详细描述和例子。OWL语义和抽象语法 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/)有OWL的标准的形式化定义。
Status of this document
本文档的状态
This document has been reviewed by W3C Members and other interested parties, and it has been endorsed by the Director as a W3C Recommendation (http://www.w3.org/2003/06/Process-20030618/tr.html#RecsW3C). W3C's role in making the Recommendation is to draw attention to the specification and to promote its widespread deployment. This enhances the functionality and interoperability of the Web.
本文档已被W3C成员及其他相关方面审阅，并已被W3C总监（W3C Director）批准为[(http://www.w3.org/2003/06/Process-20030618/tr.html#RecsW3C W3C推荐标准]（W3C Recommendation）。W3C 制定推荐标准的任务是使之受到关注，并促使其被广泛应用。这将增强Web的功能性与互操作性。
This is one of six parts (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s1.1) of the W3C Recommendation for OWL, the Web Ontology Language. It has been developed by the Web Ontology Working Group (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/) as part of the W3C Semantic Web Activity (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/) (Activity Statement (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Activity), Group Charter (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/charter)) for publication on 10 February 2004.
本文档是W3C关于Web本体语言OWL的推荐标准的六个部分 (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s1.1)之一。
它已经被Web 本体工作小组 (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/) (小组章程 (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/charter)) 作为W3C语义Web行动 (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/) (行动声明 (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Activity)) 的一部分于2004年2月10日发布。
The design of OWL expressed in earlier versions of these documents has been widely reviewed and satisfies the Working Group's technical requirements (http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/). The Working Group has addressed all comments received (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/), making changes as necessary. Changes to this document since the Proposed Recommendation version (http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/PR-owl-features-20031215/) are detailed in the change log (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#changes-since-PR).
本文档的早期版本中所描述的关于OWL的设计已被广泛评阅，并已满足工作小组的技术需求 (http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/)。.工作小组充分考虑所有收到的意见 (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/)，并做了必要的修改。本文档自从候选推荐标准版本 (http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/PR-owl-features-20031215/)以来的所有修改都在文后的变更日志 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/#changes-since-PR)中。
Comments are welcome at public-webont-comments@w3.org (mailto:public-webont-comments@w3.org) (archive (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/)) and general discussion of related technology is welcome at www-rdf-logic@w3.org (mailto:www-rdf-logic@w3.org) (archive).
A list of implementations (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/impls) is available.
欢迎通过public-webont-comments@w3.org (mailto:public-webont-comments@w3.org)(历史存档 (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/))提出您的意见，也可以通过www-rdf-logic@w3.org (mailto:www-rdf-logic@w3.org)(历史存档 (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-logic/)) 参与相关技术的讨论。
The W3C maintains a list of any patent disclosures related to this work.
可以访问到有关实现 (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/impls)的一个列表。
W3C维护着一个与这些工作相关的专利声明的目录。
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 publications and the latest revision of this technical report can be found in the W3C technical reports index (http://www.w3.org/TR/) at http://www.w3.org/TR/.
这节描述了本文档在发布时的状态。其他文档可能替代这文档。一份当前W3C的最新出版物的目录和这个技术报告的最新版本可以在 W3C技术报告索引 (http://www.w3.org/TR/)http://www.w3.org/TR/ 上找到。
目录
- 引言
- 文档指南
- 为什么要OWL?
- OWL的三个子语言
- 本文档结构
- OWL语言概要
- OWL Lite概要
- OWL DL与OWL Full 概要
- OWL Lite 语言描述
- OWL Lite的RDF Schema特性
- OWL Lite的等式和不等式
- OWL Lite的属性特征
- OWL Lite的属性约束
- OWL Lite的受限基数
- OWL Lite的类交集
- OWL的数据类型
- OWL Lite的头信息
- OWL Lite的注解属性
- OWL Lite的版本
- OWL DL和OWL Full的附加语言描述
- 总结
- 参考文献
- 致谢
- 变更日志
1. Introduction
1. 引言
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 interpretable content on the Web. OWL is a revision of the DAML+OIL web ontology language (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#DAMLReference) incorporating lessons learned from the design and application of DAML+OIL.
本文档描述了OWL Web本体语言。OWL旨在用于那些需要由应用程序而不是由人类来处理文档中的信息的情形。OWL可被用来明确表示词汇表中术语的含义以及术语间的关系。如此表示的术语及术语间的关系的表示被称为本体(ontology)。在表达含义和语义方面，OWL比XML、RDF和RDF-S有更多的表达手段，因此在Web上表达机器可理解内容的能力也比这些语言强。OWL是DAML+OIL Web本体语言 (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#DAMLReference)的修改版，并吸取了在DAML+OIL的设计和应用中得到的经验教训。
1.1 Document Roadmap
1.1 文档指南
The OWL Language is described by a set of documents, each fulfilling a different purpose, and catering to a different audience. The following provides a brief roadmap for navigating through this set of documents:
OWL语言是通过一系列文档来说明的，每个文档都有不同的目的，并面向不同的读者。下面给出浏览这些文档的一个简要指南：
- This OWL Overview (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/) gives a simple introduction to OWL by providing a language feature listing with very brief feature descriptions;
- OWL概述 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/)(OWL Overview)，即本文，通过列出OWL的语言特征并给出其简要的描述，对OWL进行了简单的介绍；
- The OWL Guide (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/) demonstrates the use of the OWL language by providing an extended example. It also provides a glossary (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#OWLGlossary) of the terminology used in these documents;
- OWL指南 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/)(OWL Guide)通过一个扩展的例子说明如何使用OWL语言。同时也给出了这些文档中用到的术语的解释；
- The OWL Reference (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/) gives a systematic and compact (but still informally stated) description of all the modelling primitives of OWL;
- OWL参考 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/) (OWL Reference)以一种系统的和简洁的方式(仍是非正式地)描述了OWL的所有建模原语(modelling primitives)；
- The OWL Semantics and Abstract Syntax (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/) document is the final and formally stated normative definition of the language;
- OWL语义和抽象语法 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/)文档是对这个语言的最终的、形式化的规范性定义；
- The OWL Web Ontology Language Test Cases (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/) document contains a large set of test cases for the language;
- OWLWeb本体语言测试用例 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/)文档包含了这个语言的一个大量的测试用例集合；
- The OWL Use Cases and Requirements (http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/) document contains a set of use cases for a web ontology language and compiles a set of requirements for OWL.
- OWL用例和需求 (http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/)文档包含了一个Web本体语言的用例集合和关于OWL的需求集合。
The suggested reading order of the first four documents is as given since they have been listed in increasing degree of technical content. The last two documents complete the documentation set.
对于前四个文档，建议按上面的排列顺序进行阅读，因为它们是按技术上的内容递增列出的。最后两个文档是整个文档集的一个完整组成部分。
1.2 Why OWL?
1.2 为何需要OWL?
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 OWL Use Cases and Requirements Document (http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/) provides more details on ontologies (http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/#onto-def), motivates the need for a Web Ontology Language in terms of six use cases (http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/#section-use-cases), and formulates design goals (http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/#section-goals), requirements (http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/#section-requirements) and objectives (http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/#section-objectives) for OWL.
语义Web是对未来Web的展望。在语义Web中，信息被赋予明确的含义，使得机器自动处理和集成Web上的信息更为容易。语义Web将构建于XML自定义标签模式的能力以及RDF灵活的描述数据的方式上。语义Web需要在RDF之上增加的第一个层次是一种能够对Web文档中的术语含义进行形式化描述的本体语言。如果希望机器能够对这些Web文档进行有效的推理工作， 这一本体语言必须超越RDF Schema的基本语义。OWL用例和需求文档 (http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/)提供了更多关于本体的细节 (http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/#onto-def)，用六个用例 (http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/#section-use-cases)推动了对OWL的需求，并且明确了OWL的设计目标 (http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/#section-goals)、需求 (http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/#section-requirements)以及目的 (http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/#section-objectives)。
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.
OWL 被设计为满足对Web本体语言的需求。OWL是W3C一系列与语义Web相关的并不断扩大的规范的一部分。
- XML (http://www.w3.org/XML/) provides a surface syntax for structured documents, but imposes no semantic constraints on the meaning of these documents. *XML 提供了一种结构化文档的表层语法（surface syntax），但没有对这些文档的含义施加任何语义约束。
- XML Schema (http://www.w3.org/XML/Schema) is a language for restricting the structure of XML documents and also extends XML with datatypes.
- XML Schema 是一个约束XML文档结构和为XML扩充了数据类型的语言。
- RDF (http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-concepts-20021108/) 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.
- RDF 是一个关于对象（或资源）和它们之间关系的数据模型，且为该数据模型提供了简单的语义，这个数据模型能够用XML语法表示。
- RDF Schema (http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-schema-20021112/) is a vocabulary for describing properties and classes of RDF resources, with a semantics for generalization-hierarchies of such properties and classes.
- RDF Schema是一个描述RDF资源的属性（property）和类（classe）的词汇表，提供了关于这些属性和类的层次结构的语义。
- 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.
- OWL 添加了更多的用于描述属性和类的词汇，例如类之间的不相交性（disjointness）、基数（cardinality，如刚好一个）、等价性、属性的更丰富类型、属性特征（例如对称性）、以及枚举类(enumerated classes)。
1.3 The three sublanguages of OWL
1.3 OWL的三个子语言
OWL provides three increasingly expressive sublanguages designed for use by specific communities of implementers and users.
OWL提供了三种表达能力递增的子语言，以分别用于特定的实现者和用户团体。
- OWL Lite 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. Owl Lite also has a lower formal complexity than OWL DL, see the section on OWL Lite in the OWL Reference (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#OWLLite) for further details.
- OWL Lite用于提供给那些只需要一个分类层次和简单约束的用户。例如，虽然OWL Lite支持支持基数限制，但只允许基数为0或1。提供支持OWL Lite的工具应该比支持其他表达能力更强的OWL子语言更简单，并且从辞典（thesauri）和分类系统（taxonomy）转换到OWL Lite更为迅速。相比OWL DL，OWL Lite还具有更低的形式复杂度，详细信息参考OWL 参考（OWL Reference）的OWL Lite部分 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#OWLLite)。
- OWL DL supports those users who want the maximum expressiveness while retaining computational completeness (all conclusions are guaranteed to be computable) 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). OWL DL is so named due to its correspondence with description logics, a field of research that has studied the logics that form the formal foundation of OWL.
- OWL DL用于支持那些需要最强表达能力而需要保持计算完备性（computational completeness，即所有的结论都能够确保被计算出来）和可判定性（decidability，即所有的计算都能在有限的时间内完成）。OWL DL包括了OWL语言的所有语言成分，但使用时必须符合一定的约束，例如，一个类可以是多个类的子类时，但它不能同时是另外一个类的实例。OWL DL 这么命名是因为它对应于描述逻辑，它是一个研究作为OWL形式基础的逻辑的研究领域。
- OWL Full 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.
- OWL Full支持那些需要尽管没有可计算性保证，但有最强的表达能力和完全自由的RDF语法的用户。例如，在OWL Full中，一个类可以被同时看为许多个体的一个集合以及本身作为一个个体。它允许在一个本体增加预定义的（RDF、OWL）词汇的含义。这样，不太可能有推理软件能支持对OWL FULL的所有成分的完全推理。
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.
在表达能力和推理能力上，每个子语言都是前面的语言的扩展。这三种子语言之间有如下关系成立，但这些关系反过来并不成立。
- Every legal OWL Lite ontology is a legal OWL DL ontology.
- 每个合法的OWL Lite本体都是一个合法的OWL DL本体；
- Every legal OWL DL ontology is a legal OWL Full ontology.
- 每个合法的OWL DL本体都是一个合法的OWL Full本体；
- Every valid OWL Lite conclusion is a valid OWL DL conclusion.
- 每个有效的OWL Lite结论都是一个有效的OWL DL结论；
- Every valid OWL DL conclusion is a valid OWL Full conclusion.
- 每个有效的OWL DL结论都是一个有效的OWL Full结论。
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. 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.
使用OWL的本体开发者要考虑哪个子语言最符合他的需求。选择OWL Lite还是OWL DL主要取决于用户在多大程度上需要OWL DL提供的表达能力更强的成分。选择OWL DL还是OWL Full主要取决于用户在多大程度上需要RDF Schema的元建模（meta-modeling）机制（如定义关于类的类和为类赋予属性）；使用OWL Full相比于OWL DL，对推理的支持是更难预测的，因为目前还没有完全的OWL Full的实现。
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 will be a legal OWL Lite or OWL DL document. Because of this, some care has to be taken when a user wants to migrate an RDF document to OWL. When the expressiveness of OWL DL or OWL Lite is deemed appropriate, some precautions have to be taken to ensure that the original RDF document complies with the additional constraints imposed by OWL DL and OWL Lite. Among others, every URI that is used as a class name must be explicitly asserted to be of type owl:Class (and similarly for properties), every individual must be asserted to belong to at least one class (even if only owl:Thing), the URI's used for classes, properties and individuals must be mutually disjoint. The details of these and other constraints on OWL DL and OWL Lite are explained in appendix E of the OWL Reference (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#app-DLinRDF).
OWL Full可以看成是对RDF的扩展，而 OWL Lite和OWL DL可以看成是对一个受限的RDF版本的扩展。所有的OWL文档（Lite，DL，Full）都是一个RDF文档；所有的RDF文档都是一个OWL Full文档，但只有一些RDF文档是一个合法的OWL Lite和OWL DL文档。因此，用户在把RDF文档转换到OWL文档时必须谨慎。当 OWL DL 或OWL Lite的表达能力认为是适当时，必须注意原来的RDF文档是否满足 OWL DL 或OWL Lite对RDF的一些附加的限制。其中，每个作为类名的URI必须明确地声明为类型为owl:Class (属性也类似)，每个个体必须声明为属于至少一个类 （即使，只有owl:Thing），用于类，属性，个体的URI必须两两不相交 。这些和其他关于OWL DL 和OWL Lite的限制的详细信息会在文档OWL 参考的附录E (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#app-DLinRDF)中解释。
1.4 The structure of this document
1.4 本文的结构
This document first describes the features in OWL Lite, followed by a description of 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).
本文档首先描述了OWL Lite的成分，接下来是OWL DL和OWL Full的额外成分（OWL DL和OWL Full包含相同的成分，但OWL Full在这些成分的组合方面更为自由）。
2. Language Synopsis
2 语言概要
This section provides a quick index to all the language features for OWL Lite, OWL DL, and OWL Full.
本节提供了一个关于OWL Lite，OWL DL和OWL Full语言特征的便捷索引。
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 rdfs:subPropertyOf indicates that subPropertyOf is already in the rdfs vocabulary (technically : the rdfs namespace). Also, the term Class is more precisely stated as owl:Class and is a term introduced by OWL.
在本文档中，斜体的术语是OWL中的术语。rdf:和rdfs:前缀表示的术语是RDF和RDF Schema中的术语，其它的则是OWL引入的。例如，术语“rdfs:subPropertyOf”表示subPropertyOf出现在rdfs词汇表中（技术上是rdfs名字空间）。同样，术语“Class”，更为精确地说是“owl:Class”， 是OWL引入的术语。
2.1 OWL Lite Synopsis
2.1 OWL Lite概要
The list of OWL Lite language constructs is given below.
OWL Lite语言的构词（constructs）如下列出。
RDF Schema Features:
RDF Schema特性：
- Class (Thing, Nothing) (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#Class)
- rdfs:subClassOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#subClassOf)
- rdf:Property (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#property)
- rdfs:subPropertyOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#subPropertyOf)
- rdfs:domain (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#domain)
- rdfs:range (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#range)
- Individual (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#Individual)
(In)Equality:
(不)等价性：
- equivalentClass (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#equivalentClass)
- equivalentProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#equivalentProperty)
- sameAs (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#sameAs)
- differentFrom (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#differentFrom)
- AllDifferent (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#AllDifferent)
- distinctMembers (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#AllDifferent)
Property Characteristics:
属性特征：
- ObjectProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#property)
- DatatypeProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#property)
- inverseOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#inverseOf)
- TransitiveProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#TransitiveProperty)
- SymmetricProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#SymmetricProperty)
- FunctionalProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#FunctionalProperty)
- InverseFunctionalProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#InverseFunctionalProperty)
Property Restrictions:
属性约束：
- Restriction (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.4)
- onProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.4)
- allValuesFrom (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#allValuesFrom)
- someValuesFrom (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#someValuesFrom)
Restricted Cardinality:
受限基数：
- minCardinality (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#minCardinality) (仅仅0或1)
- maxCardinality (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#maxCardinality) (仅仅0或1)
- cardinality (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#Cardinality) (仅仅0或1)
Header Information:
头信息：
- Ontology (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.8)
- imports (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.8)
Class Intersection:
类的交集：
- intersectionOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#intersectionOf)
Versioning:
版本信息：
- versionInfo (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.10)
- priorVersion (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.10)
- backwardCompatibleWith (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.10)
- incompatibleWith (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.10)
- DeprecatedClass (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.10)
- DeprecatedProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.10)
Annotation Properties:
注解属性：
- rdfs:label (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.9)
- rdfs:comment (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.9)
- rdfs:seeAlso (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.9)
- rdfs:isDefinedBy (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.9)
- AnnotationProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.9)
- OntologyProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.9)
Datatypes
数据类型：
- xsd datatypes (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.7)
2.2 OWL DL and Full Synopsis
2.2 OWL DL和Full概要
The list of OWL DL and OWL Full language constructs that are in addition to or expand those of OWL Lite is given below.
扩展了OWL Lite的OWL DL和OWL Full语言的构词如下列出。
Class Axioms:
类的公理：
- oneOf, dataRange (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#oneOf)
- disjointWith (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#disjointWith)
- equivalentClass (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#complexClassFull)
(可应用于类表达式)
- rdfs:subClassOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#complexClassFull)
(可应用于类表达式)
Boolean Combinations of Class Expressions:
类表达式的布尔组合：
- unionOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#booleanFull)
- complementOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#booleanFull)
- intersectionOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#booleanFull)
Arbitrary Cardinality:
任意的基数：
- minCardinality (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#cardinalityFull)
- maxCardinality (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#cardinalityFull)
- cardinality (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#cardinalityFull)
Filler Information:
填充值信息：
- hasValue (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#hasValue)
3. Language Description of OWL Lite
3. OWL Lite语言概要
This section provides an informal description of the OWL Lite language features. We do not discuss the specific syntax of these features (see the OWL Reference (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/) for definitions). Each language feature is hyperlinked to the appropriate place in the OWL Guide (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/) for more examples and guidance on usage.
这节提供一个对OWL Lite语言特征的非正式描述。我们不讨论这些特征（参考OWL Reference (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/)）的具体语法。为方便查看语言特征的例子和使用指南，每个语言特征有一个链向OWL 指南 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/)的合适地方的链接。
OWL Lite uses only some of the OWL language features and has more limitations on the use of the features than OWL DL or OWL Full. For example, 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.
和OWL DL和OWL Full相比，OWL Lite只是使用了OWL语言的部分特征，并且做了更多的关于特征使用的限制。例如，在OWL Lite 中，类只能根据命名了的父类（superclass,它不能是任意的类表达式）定义，而且只能使用某些特定类型的类约束（class restriction）。类之间的等价关系（equivalence）和子类关系只能在具名类（named class）上做声明，不能应用于任意的类表达式。类似地，OWL Lite只允许属性限制应用于命名了的类。另外，OWL Lite对基数的概念也有限制--它的取值范围只能是0和1。
3.1 OWL Lite RDF Schema Features
3.1 OWL Lite 的 RDF Schema 特性
The following OWL Lite features related to RDF Schema are included.
以下包括了与RDF Schema有关系的OWL Lite特性：
- Class (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_Class): 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 subClassOf. There is a built-in most general class named Thing (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#DefiningSimpleClasses) that is the class of all individuals and is a superclass of all OWL classes. There is also a built-in most specific class named Nothing (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#DefiningSimpleClasses) that is the class that has no instances and a subclass of all OWL classes.
- Class (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_Class)： 一个类定义了因共有某些属性而同属一组的一些个体。例如，Deborah和Frank都是类Person（人）的成员。多个类也可以用“子类”（subClassOf）关系组织为一个特定的层次结构。一个内置的最一般的类被称为Thing (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#DefiningSimpleClasses) ，它是所有个体的类，同时也是所有 OWL 类的父类。另外还有一个内置的最特殊类被称为Nothing (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#DefiningSimpleClasses) ，它没有任何实例，因此是任意 OWL 类的子类。
- rdfs:subClassOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#rdfs_subClassOf): 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 also a Mammal.
- rdfs:subClassOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#rdfs_subClassOf)：可以给出一个或多个关于“一个类是另一类的子类”的陈述来创建一个类层次结构（Class hierarchies）。例如，可以声明类Person（人)是类Mammal（哺乳动物）的子类。一个推理机就可以据此推出：如果某个个体是一个“人”，那么它也是一个“哺乳动物”。
- rdf:Property (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#DefiningProperties): 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 occurences of ObjectProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#DefiningProperties)), 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 an occurence of DatatypeProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#DefiningProperties)). Both owl:ObjectProperty and owl:DatatypeProperty are subclasses (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#ObjectProperty-def) of the RDF class rdf:Property.
- rdf:Property (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#DefiningProperties)：属性能用来表述个体之间或者从个体到数值的的关系。属性的例子有：hasChild（有孩子），hasRelative（有亲属），hasSibling（有兄弟姐妹） 和 hasAge（有年龄） 等。前三个属性可以用于关联“人”类里的两个不同实例 (因而被看作ObjectProperty(对象属性) (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#DefiningProperties)的例子)，最后一个 (hasAge) 能用来关联从“人”类的某个实例到某个整数型数值 (因而被看作DatatypeProperty(数据属性) (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#DefiningProperties) 的例子)。owl:ObjectProperty 和 owl:DatatypeProperty 都是 RDF 类 rdf:Property 的子类 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#ObjectProperty-def)。
- rdfs:subPropertyOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#rdfs_subPropertyOf): 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.
- rdfs:subPropertyOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#rdfs_subPropertyOf)：通过给出一个或多个陈述声明“某属性是另外一个或多个属性的子属性”可建立属性层次。例如，可以声明 hasSibling是 hasRelative 的子属性。据此，一个推理机可以推出：如果一个个体以 hasSibling属性与另一个体相关联，那么它也一定与另外那个个体以 hasRelative 属性相关联。
- rdfs:domain (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#term_domain): A domain of a property limits the individuals to which the property can be applied. If a property relates an 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 rdfs:domain 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 property restrictions for more information.
- rdfs:domain (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#term_domain)： 一个属性的定义域用来约束该属性可以适用的个体。如果一个个体以一个属性和另一个体关联，并且该属性用某个类作为它的一个定义域，那么该个体必然属于这个类。例如，属性 hasChild 可能声明其定义域为Mammal。据此，一个推理机就可以推出：如果Frank hasChild Anna，那么Frank必然是一个类Mammal的实例。注意 "rdfs:domain" 被称为全局限制，因为该限制是在此属性上声明的，而不只是当这个属性应用于某个类时声明的。参见下面有关属性限制的更详细讨论。
- rdfs:range (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#term_range): 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 individual 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. AllValuesFrom (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#allValuesFrom)) for more information.
- rdfs:range (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#term_range)：一个属性的值域用来限制哪些个体可以成为属性的值。如果一个个体以一个属性和另一个体关联，并且该属性的值域是一个类，那么另外那个个体必然属于此类。例如，可以声明属性 hasChild 的值域是类Mammal。据此，推理机可以推出：如果Louise以 hasChild 属性和Deborah关联 (即Deborah是Louise的孩子)，那么Deborah是类Mammal的实例。值域同上面的定义域 一样也是全局限制。同样，请参看下面关于局部限制 (即 AllValuesFrom (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#allValuesFrom)) 的更详细讨论。
- Individual (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#term_individual) : 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.
- Individual (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#term_individual) ： 个体是类的实例，个体之间可以用属性相互关联。例如，一个名为“Deborah”的个体可以被声明为类Person的一个实例，个体Deborah可以用属性 hasEmployer 来和个体“斯坦福大学”关联。
3.2 OWL Lite Equality and Inequality
3.2 OWL Lite 的等式和不等式
The following OWL Lite features are related to equality or inequality.
下面的OWL Lite特征是关于等价性和不等价性的。
- equivalentClass (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_equivalentClass) : 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 equivalentClass 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.
- equivalentClass (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_equivalentClass) ：两个类可以被声明为等价，即它们拥有相同的实例。等价性可以用来创建同义类。例如，类Car可以被说成是类Automobile的等价类。据此，推理机可以推出：任何Car的实例都是Automobile的实例，反之也一样。
- equivalentProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_equivalentProperty): 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 equivalentProperty 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.
- equivalentProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_equivalentProperty)：两个属性也可以被声明为等价。相互等价的属性将一个个体关联到同一组其它个体。它也可以被用来创建同义属性。例如，HasLeader可以被说成是hasHead的等价属性（equivalentProperty）。据此，推理机能够推出：如果X通过属性HasLeader与Y关联，那么X也通过属性hasHead与Y关联。推理机还能推出：HasLeader是hasHead的子属性，hasHead同时也是HasLeader的子属性。
- sameAs (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_sameAs): Two individuals may be stated to be the same. These constructs 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.
- sameAs (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_sameAs)：两个个体也可以被声明为相同。这个构词可以被用来创建一系列指向同一个个体的名字。例如，个体Deborah可能被声明为与DeborahMcGuinness是同一个个体。
- differentFrom (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#differentFrom): 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.
- differentFrom (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#differentFrom)：一个个体可以声明为和其他个体不同。例如，个体Frank可被说成与Deborah以及Jim是不同的个体，这样当个体Frank和Deborah都是一个被声明为函数型（functional，即属性值最多一个的）属性的值时，就会有矛盾。在使用如OWL（RDF）等语言时，由于这些语言不假设个体有而且只有一个名字，明确声明个体是不同的显得很重要。例如，没有其他附加信息的话，推理机不会推出Deborah和Frank指的是不同的个体。//译注：此处指没有第二个关于Deborah和Frank个体的信息。
- AllDifferent (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_AllDifferent): 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. It is used in conjunction with distinctMembers (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_distinctMembers) to state that all members of a list are distinct and pairwise disjoint.
- AllDifferent (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_AllDifferent)：在一个allDifferent陈述中，我们可以指出一定数量的个体两两不同。例如，可以用allDifferent构词建立声明Frank、Deborah、Jim两两不同。和differentFrom构词不一样，这会强调为Jim和Deborah也是不同的(不仅仅是Frank不同于Deborah跟Frank不同于Jim)。AllDifferent在表达一个集合中的对象互不相同且建模者有意强调对这些个体的唯一名假设时尤其有用。它常和distinctMembers一起使用，来声明列表中的成员都是独特的且两两不同的。
3.3 OWL Lite Property Characteristics
3.3 OWL Lite 的属性特征
There are special identifiers in OWL Lite that are used to provide information concerning properties and their values. The distinction between ObjectProperty and DatatypeProperty is mentioned above (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#property) in the property description.
在OWL Lite中有一些特定的标识符用以提供关于属性及其值的信息。对象属性和数据属性的区别在上面 (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#property) 的属性描述中提到了。
- inverseOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_inverseOf): 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.
- inverseOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_inverseOf)：一个属性可以被声明为另一个属性的逆属性。如果P1被声明为P2的逆属性，那么如果X通过P2关联到Y，则Y通过P1关联到X。例如，如果已知hasChild是hasParent的逆属性，Deborah hasParent Louise（Deborah的父亲是Louise），那么推理机可推出：Louise hasChild Deborah（Louise 有个孩子是 Deborah）。
- TransitiveProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_TransitiveProperty): 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).
- TransitiveProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_TransitiveProperty)：属性可以被声明为传递的。如果(x,y)是传递属性P的一个实例，(y,z)也是传递属性P的一个实例，那么(x,z)是传递属性P的一个实例。例如，如果属性ancestor（祖先）被声明为传递的，且Sara是Louise的祖先（也就是说，(Sara,Louise)是属性ancestor的一个实例），且Louise是Deborah的祖先（也就是说，(Louise,Deborah)是属性ancestor的一个实例），那么推理机可推出：且Sara是Deborah的祖先((Sara,Deborah)是属性ancestor的一个实例)。OWL Lite和OWL DL给出了关于传递属性的一个边界条件：传递属性和它的父属性（superproperty）不能有值为1的最大基数（maxCardinality）限制。如果没有这个边界条件，OWL Lite和OWL DL都将成为不可判定语言。更多信息参考文档OWL语义和抽象语法 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/)的属性公理那节。
- SymmetricProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_SymmetricProperty): 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.
- SymmetricProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_SymmetricProperty):属性可以被声明为是对称的。如果(x,y)是对称属性P的一个实例，那么(y,x)也是它的一个实例。例如，属性friend（朋友）可以被声明为一个对称属性，如果Frank 是 Deborah的朋友，则推理机可推出Deborah 也是Frank的朋友。
- FunctionalProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_FunctionalProperty) : 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.
- FunctionalProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_FunctionalProperty) :属性可以被声明为只有唯一值。即一个属性如果被声明为函数型属性（FunctionalProperty），那么对于每个个体，属性最多只有一个值（也可能对某些个体没有值）。函数型属性可以被方便地用来说明一个属性的基数（cardinality）最小为0，最大为1。例如，属性hasPrimaryEmployer 可以被声明为一个函数型属性，这样，推理机可以推出：不存在个体有多个的首要雇主（primary employer），然而这并不意味着每个人都有至少一个首要雇主。
- InverseFunctionalProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_InverseFunctionalProperty): 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.
- InverseFunctionalProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_InverseFunctionalProperty):如果一个属性被声明为反函数型的（inverse functional），则意味着它的逆属性是函数型的，也就是说该属性的逆属性对任何一个个体来说最多只有一个值。这个特征也被称为单值(unambiguous)属性//*译注：标识性/标记属性，区别属性，判别属性，即任何两个不同个体不能具有相同的反函数属性值，而不是说单值，一个个体可能有多个标识性属性值*//。例如，HasUSSocialSecurityNumber（社会安全号(Social Security Number,SSN)是美国居民的唯一标识符）可以被声明为反函数型。对任意个体(其类型是社会安全号)，该属性的逆属性（isTheSocialSecurityNumberFor）的值最多一个。由此任何人的社会安全号是属性isTheSocialSecurityNumberFor的唯一值//* 同意此处为原作者笔误*//。据此，推理机可推出：没有两个不同的人（类Person的实例）能有相同的美国社会安全号。另外，还可以推断出：如果两个人(Person的实例)有相同的社会安全号，那么这两个实例表示同一个个体。
3.4 OWL Lite Property Restrictions
3.4 OWL Lite的属性约束
OWL Lite allows restrictions to be placed on how properties can be used by instances of a class. These type (and the cardinality restrictions in the next subsection) are used within the context of an owl:Restriction (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#PropertyRestrictions). The owl:onProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#PropertyRestrictions) element indicates the restricted property. The following two restrictions limit which values can be used while the next section's restrictions limit how many values can be used.
OWL Lite允许对属性施加约束，使得属性能够适用于一些特定类的实例。这些类型（包括下一节的基数限定）都在owl:Restriction (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#PropertyRestrictions)中使用。而元素owl:onProperty (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#PropertyRestrictions) 则用于指示被约束的属性。下面的两种约束限制了什么值可以用，而下一节的约束限制了可以取多少个值。
- allValuesFrom (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_allValuesFrom): 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 hasDaughter restricted to have allValuesFrom the class Woman. This means that if an individual person Louise is related by the property hasDaughter to the individual Deborah, then from this a reasoner can deduce that Deborah is an instance of the class Woman. This restriction allows the property hasDaughter 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, hasDaughter 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.
- allValuesFrom (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_allValuesFrom)：约束allValuesFrom是对属性适用于某个类时声明的。它的意思是这个属性用于这个类时有一个局部性值域约束。因此，如果一个类的实例通过这个属性和另一个体关联，那么另外那个个体则能被判定是该局部值域约束类的一个实例。例如，类Person有一个属性hasDaugter(有女儿)，该属性有个allValuesFrom为类Woman的约束。这意味着，如果类Person的一个实例Louise通过属性hasDaughter和另一个体Deborah关联（译者注：即表示Louise有个女儿Deborah），那么，推理机能推出：Deborah是类Woman的一个实例。该约束使得属性hasDaughter可以用于其他类(如类Cat)，并且当该属性用于其它类时声明一个适合的值约束。这里，假如属性hasDaughter用于类Cat，其局部值域约束为类Cat；假如属性用于类Person，它的局部值域约束类就是Person。注意：推理机并不能从属性的allValuesFrom约束推出属性至少有一个值。
- someValuesFrom (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_someValuesFrom): The restriction someValuesFrom 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 someValuesFrom restriction on the hasKeyword property that states that some 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 someValuesFrom restriction. Unlike allValuesFrom, someValuesFrom 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 hasKeyword property to at least one instance of the SemanticWebTopic class. Note that a reasoner can not deduce (as it could with allValuesFrom restrictions) that all values of hasKeyword are instances of the SemanticWebTopic class
- someValuesFrom (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_someValuesFrom)：约束allValuesFrom是对属性适用于某个类时声明的。一个类可能对它的属性有个约束，即这个属性至少有一个值是属于某个类型。例如，类SemanticWebPaper(语义Web论文)对属性hasKeyword（具备关键词）可以有个“someValuesFrom” 约束，声明属性hasKeyword的的某个值应该是属于类SemanticWebTopic（语义Web主题）的一个实例。这允许给出多个关键词，只要有一个或多个关键词是类SemanticWebTopic的实例，那么这样的论文就会满足该someValuesFrom 约束。和allValuesFrom不同， someValuesFrom 不限制属性的取值必须都是同一类的实例。如果myPaper是类SemanticWebPaper的一个实例，则myPaper的属性hasKeyword至少有一个值是类SemanticWebTopic的实例。注意：推理机并不能推出属性hasKeyword的所有取值都是SemanticWebTopic的实例。
3.5 OWL Lite Restricted Cardinality
3.5 OWL Lite的受限基数
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).
OWL Lite包含了一个有一定使用限制的基数约束。OWL（OWL Lite也如此）的基数约束被称为局部约束，因为他们是对一个属性应用于某特定类时的声明。也就是说：这类约束应用于那个类的实例时就会给出属性的基数信息。OWL Lite的基数约束是有限制的是因为它们只允许基数值为0或1的陈述（他们不像在OWL DL和OWL Full中那样允许基数值为任意数目）。
- minCardinality (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_minCardinality): Cardinality is stated on a property with respect to a particular class. If a minCardinality 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 required 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 hasOffspring 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).
- minCardinality (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_minCardinality)：基数是对属性应用于某个类时声明的。如果就某个类而言，声明一个属性的minCardinality（最小基数）为1，则这个类的任何一个实例都通过该属性至少和一个个体相关。这也是一种用来表达对一个类的每个实例，这个属性必须有一个值的办法。例如，类Person在属性hasOffspring（有后代）上并没有任何的最小基数约束（minimum cardinality restrictions），因为不是所有的人都有子孙后代的。但类Parent（父母）则在属性hasOffspring上必须有minCardinality为1。如果推理机知道Louise是一个人（Person），推理机并不能推出有关属性hasOffspring的基数的信息；但是一旦发现 Louise是一个Parent的实例，则可以推出Louise通过属性hasOffspring的至少与一个个体关联。但只有这些信息，推理机并不能推出类Parent的实例的后代数目的最大值。在OWL Lite中，最小基数的值只允许为0或1。0表示的意思是对于某个类而言这个属性是可选的（在缺乏更详细信息的情况下）。例如，类Person在属性hasOffspring上的最小基数值可以为0（而此属性用于类Parent时声明了最小基数为1的更详细信息）。
- maxCardinality (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_maxCardinality): Cardinality is stated on a property with respect to a particular class. If a maxCardinality 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 any individuals by the property hasSpouse. This situation is represented by a maximum cardinality of zero on the hasSpouse property on the class UnmarriedPerson.
- maxCardinality (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_maxCardinality)：基数是对属性适用于某个类时声明的。如果属性适用于某个类时的maxCardinality（最大基数）为1，则这个类的任意实例都通过这个属性和至多一个个体关联。有约束maxCardinality为1的属性有时也叫做函数型(functional)或者唯一值(unique)属性。例如，属性hasRegisteredVotingState(有登记投票权州)应用于类UnitedStatesCitizens（美国公民）时，其最大基数可以为1（因为一个公民只允许在最多一个州投票）。这样推理机可以推出类UnitedStatesCitizens的实例不可以通过hasRegisteredVotingState属性和两个或多个不同个体相关联。仅仅从最大基数为1的约束，推理机不能推出其最小基数也为1。有时在某些类上声明某个属性没有值是有用的。例如，类UnmarriedPerson（未婚的人）的实例不能通过属性hasSpouse（有配偶）和任何个体关联，这种情形可表示为：属性hasSpouse适用于类UnmarriedPerson时的最大基数值为0。
- cardinality (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_cardinality): Cardinality is provided as a convenience when it is useful to state that a property on a class has both minCardinality 0 and maxCardinality 0 or both minCardinality 1 and maxCardinality 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.
- cardinality (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_cardinality)：基数是用于方便地表示属性适用一个类时同时具有约束“minCardinality”为0和“maxCardinality”为0或者同时“minCardinality”为1和“maxCardinality”为1。例如，类person的属性hasBirthMother（亲生母亲）只有一个值。这样推理机可以推出属于类Mother的两个不同实例不能同时是同一个人的hasBirthMother属性值。
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 publicly available webont mail archives with the most relevant message at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Oct/0063.html.
任何这些形式受限制的基数约束其他的命名方式曾被提出讨论过。目前的一些推荐是只在前端（台）系统中包含任何这类命称。关于这个话题的更多信息可以在公开的webont邮件列表中找到，其中最相关的消息是http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Oct/0063.html。
3.6 OWL Lite Class Intersection
3.6 OWL Lite的类交集
OWL Lite contains an intersection constructor but limits its usage.
OWL Lite包含了一个有使用限制的交集构词( intersection constructor )。
- intersectionOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_intersectionOf): OWL Lite allows intersections of named classes and restrictions. For example, the class EmployedPerson can be described as the intersectionOf 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.
- intersectionOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_intersectionOf)：OWL Lite允许在具名类和约束中的交集。例如，类EmployedPerson(雇员)可定义为类Person和类EmployedThings (被雇佣者) 的交集（"intersectionOf"），其中类EmployedThings可定义为拥有hasEmployer (有雇主) 属性并该属性有约束minCardinality为1。推理机可以据此推出：任意一个EmployedPerson的实例都具有至少一个雇主。
3.7 OWL Datatypes
3.7 OWL的数据类型
OWL uses the RDF mechanisms for data values. See the OWL Guide section on datatypes (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#Datatypes1) for a more detailed description of the built-in OWL datatypes taken largely from the XML Schema datatypes.
对于数值，OWL 使用了RDF的机制。 OWL内置的数据类型大部分是采用XML Schema的数据类型。更详细的描述参考OWL 指南 关于数据类型的那节 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#Datatypes1) 。
3.8 OWL Lite Header Information
3.8 OWL Lite的头信息
OWL Lite supports notions of ontology inclusion and relationships and attaching information to ontologies. See the OWL Reference (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/) for details and the OWL Guide (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/) for examples.
OWL Lite支持本体的引用，关系和元信息描述等概念。详细信息请参考 OWL 参考 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/)，一些例子可参考OWL 指南 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/)。
3.9 OWL Lite Annotation Properties
3.9 OWL Lite的注解属性
OWL Lite allows annotations on classes, properties, individuals and ontology headers. The use of these annotations is subject to certain restrictions. See the section on Annotations in the OWL Reference (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#Annotations) for details.
OWL Lite允许对类，属性，个体和本体头信息的注解。这些注解的使用也有些限制。详细信息参考OWL参考中关于注解的那节 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#Annotations) 。
3.10 OWL Lite Versioning
3.10 OWL Lite的版本
RDF already has a small vocabulary for describing versioning information. OWL significantly extends this vocabulary. See the OWL Reference (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#Header) for further details.
RDF 已经有一个小的词汇集用以描述版本信息(译者注：RDF中并没有词汇集表示版本信息，怀疑作者笔误)，OWL大量地扩充了这个词汇集。详细信息参考OWL 参考 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#Header)。
4. Incremental Language Description of OWL DL and OWL Full
4. OWL DL和OWL Full的附加语言描述
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 OWL Semantics and Abstract Syntax (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/) document explains the distinctions and limitations. We describe the OWL DL and OWL Full vocabulary that extends the constructions of OWL Lite below.
OWL DL和OWL Full使用相同的词汇集，只不过OWL DL的词汇集受到一些限制。粗略地说，OWL DL要求类型分离(一个类不能同时是一个个体或属性，一个属性也不能同时是个体或类)。这意味着，约束不能应用于OWL语言自身的成分(OWL Full中是允许的)。此外，OWL DL要求属性是对象属性，或数据属性：数据属性是类的实例和RDF文字和XML Schema数据类型的值的关系；而对象属性是两个类的实例之间的关系。OWL语义和抽象语法 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/)文档解释了这些区别和限制。下面我们描述对OWL Lite扩展了的OWL DL和OWL Full词汇集。
- oneOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_oneOf): (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.
- oneOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_oneOf)(枚举类)：类可以通过列举组成这个类的所有个体来描述。类的成员正是所列举个体的集合，不多不少。例如，类daysOfTheWeek(一周的所有天)可以通过枚举Sunday，Monday，Tuesday，Wednesday，Thursday，Friday和Saturday这些个体来描述。据此推理机可以推出：任一属性若其allValuesFrom的约束是类daysOfTheWeek，则此属性的最大基数(maximum cardinality )是7。
- hasValue (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_hasValue): (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. (The nationality value, theNetherlands, is an instance of the class of Nationalities).
- hasValue (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_hasValue)（属性值）：一个属性可以被要求拥有一个特定的个体作为它的值（有时称为属性值，property values）。例如，类dutchCitizens（荷兰人）的实例可被描述为：那些属性nationality（国家）的值为theNetherlands（荷兰）的人。（nationality的值，theNetherlands，是类nationalies（国籍）的一个实例）。
- disjointWith (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_disjointWith): Classes may be stated to be disjoint from each other. 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 not an instance of Woman.
- disjointWith (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_disjointWith)（不相交）：类可以被声明为互不相交。例如，类Man和类Woman可定义为是不相交的。从不相交（“disjointWith”）陈述中，推理机可推出：如果一个个体被声明为同时是两个不相交的类的实例，则是矛盾的；类似地，如果A是类Man的一个实例，则A一定不是类Woman的实例。
- unionOf, complementOf, intersectionOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_unionOf) (Boolean combinations): OWL DL and OWL Full allow 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 not 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.
- unionOf, complementOf, intersectionOf (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_unionOf) (布尔组合)：OWL DL 和 OWL Full允许类和约束之间的任意布尔组合：unionOf（并），complementOf（补）和intersectionOf（交）。例如，通过unionOf，我们能够声明一个类，它包含的事物是USCitizens或者是DutchCitizens。通过complementOf，我们能够声明children（孩子）不是SeniorCitizens（成年公民）(也就是说：类Children是类SeniorCitizens的补的子类)。欧盟的公民可以描述为其成员国家的所有公民的并。
- minCardinality, maxCardinality, cardinality (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_cardinality) (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 to be restricted to cardinality 0).
- minCardinality, maxCardinality, cardinality (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#owl_cardinality) (完全基数)：在OWL Lite中，基数的值被限制为最小，或最大为0或1，完全的OWL允许其取值为任意非负整数。例如，类 DINKs（"Dual Income, No Kids"，双份收入，没有孩子）会约束属性hasIncome的最小基数为2，同时约束属性hasChild的基数为0。
- complex classes : 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. 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.
- complex classes（复杂类）：OWL Lite中的很多构子都在语法上限制为单个的类名(例如，在subClassOf 或 equivalentClass声明中)。OWL Full对这个限制扩充为允许复杂的类表达式，包括枚举类，属性约束，布尔组合。OWL Full也允许类被用做一个实例（OWL DL 和 OWL Lite 不可以）。更多信息参考文档OWL 指南的“Design for Use“部分。
5. Summary
5. 总结
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 OWL reference (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/) document, the OWL Guide (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/), and the OWL Semantics and Abstract Syntax (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/) document for more details. Previous versions ( December 15, 2003 (http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/PR-owl-features-20031215/), September 5, 2003 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLOverviewSep52003.htm), August 18, 2003 (http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-owl-features-20030818/), July 30, 2003 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLOverviewJuly302003.htm), May 1, 2003 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLOverviewMay12003.htm), March 20, 2003 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLFeatureSynopsisMarch202003.htm), January 2, 2003 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLFeatureSynopsisJan22003.htm), July 29, 2002 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLFeatureSynopsisJuly29.htm), July 8, 2002 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLFeatureSynopsisJuly8.htm), June 23, 2002 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLFeatureSynopsisJune23.htm), May 26, 2002 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/complianceMay262002.html), and May 15, 2002 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/complianceMay152002.html)) of this document provide the historical view of the evolution of OWL Lite and the issues discussed in its evolution.
本文档提供了一个Web本体语言OWL的概述，简单介绍了为什么需要一个Web本体语言和OWL和其他相关的W3C语言的关系。它还提供了三个OWL子语言：OWL Lite，OWL DL和OWL Full的简要描述，包括每个语言的成分的概要。本文是成分概要文档的升级版本。它还提供了这些构词的简单描述以及一些简单的例子。为相信信息它引用了OWL参考 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/)文档，OWL指南 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/)和OWL 语义和抽象语法 (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/) 文档。本文档的早先版本( December 15, 2003 (http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/PR-owl-features-20031215/), September 5, 2003 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLOverviewSep52003.htm), August 18, 2003 (http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-owl-features-20030818/), July 30, 2003 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLOverviewJuly302003.htm), May 1, 2003 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLOverviewMay12003.htm), March 20, 2003 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLFeatureSynopsisMarch202003.htm), January 2, 2003 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLFeatureSynopsisJan22003.htm), July 29, 2002 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLFeatureSynopsisJuly29.htm), July 8, 2002 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLFeatureSynopsisJuly8.htm), June 23, 2002 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/OWLFeatureSynopsisJune23.htm), May 26, 2002 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/complianceMay262002.html), and May 15, 2002 (http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/webont/complianceMay152002.html))提供了OWL Lite的演化的历史视角和在这个演化过程中讨论的问题。
References
参考文献
[OWL Guide]
OWL Web Ontology Language Guide (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-guide-20040210/), Michael K. Smith, Chris Welty, and Deborah L. McGuinness, Editors, W3C Recommendation, 10 February 2004, http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-guide-20040210/ . Latest version (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/) available at http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/ .
[OWL Reference]
OWL Web Ontology Language Reference (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-ref-20040210/), Mike Dean and Guus Schreiber, Editors, W3C Recommendation, 10 February 2004, http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-ref-20040210/ . Latest version (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/) available at http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/ .
[OWL Abstract Syntax and Semantics]
OWL Web Ontology Language Semantics and Abstract Syntax (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-semantics-20040210/), Peter F. Patel-Schneider, Pat Hayes, and Ian Horrocks, Editors, W3C Recommendation, 10 February 2004, http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-semantics-20040210/ . Latest version (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/) available at http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/ .
[OWL Test]
OWL Web Ontology Language Test Cases (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-test-20040210/), Jeremy J. Carroll and Jos De Roo, Editors, W3C Recommendation, 10 February 2004, http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-test-20040210/ . Latest version (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/) available at http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/ .
[OWL Requirements]
OWL Web Ontology Language Use Cases and Requirements (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-webont-req-20040210/), Jeff Heflin, Editor, W3C Recommendation, 10 February 2004, http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-webont-req-20040210/ . Latest version (http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/) available at http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/ .
[OWL Issues]
Web Ontology Issue Status. Michael K. Smith, ed. 1 November 2003.
[DAML+OIL Reference]
DAML+OIL Reference Description . Dan Connolly, Frank van Harmelen, Ian Horrocks, Deborah L. McGuinness, Peter F. Patel-Schneider, and Lynn Andrea Stein. W3C Note 18 December 2001.
[XML]
Extensible Markup Language (XML).
[XML Schema]
XML Schema .
[XML-SCHEMA2]
XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes - W3C Recommendation (http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/), World Wide Web Consortium, 2 May 2001.
[RDF/XML Syntax]
RDF/XML Syntax Specification (Revised) (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-syntax-grammar-20040210/), Dave Beckett, Editor, W3C Recommendation, 10 February 2004, http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-syntax-grammar-20040210/ . Latest version (http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/) available at http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/ .
[RDF Concepts]
Resource Description Framework (RDF): Concepts and Abstract Syntax (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/), Graham Klyne and Jeremy J. Carroll, Editors, W3C Recommendation, 10 February 2004, http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/ . Latest version (http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/) available at http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/ .
[RDF Schema]
RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-schema-20040210/), Dan Brickley and R. V. Guha, Editors, W3C Recommendation, 10 February 2004, http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-schema-20040210/ . Latest version (http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/) available at http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/ .
[RDF Semantics]
RDF Semantics (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-mt-20040210/), Patrick Hayes, Editor, W3C Recommendation, 10 February 2004, http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-mt-20040210/ . Latest version (http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/) available at http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/ .
[Description Logics]
The Description Logic Handbook. Franz Baader, Diego Calvanese, Deborah McGuinness, Daniele Nardi, Peter Patel-Schneider, editors. Cambridge University Press, 2003; and Description Logics Home Page.
Acknowledgements
致谢
This document is the result of extensive discussions within the Web Ontology Working Group (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/) as a whole. The participants in this Working Group included: Yasser alSafadi, Jean-Fran?ois Baget, James Barnette, Sean Bechhofer, Jonathan Borden, Frederik Brysse, Stephen Buswell, Jeremy Carroll, Dan Connolly, Peter Crowther, Jonathan Dale, Jos De Roo, David De Roure, Mike Dean, Larry Eshelman, Jér?me Euzenat, Tim Finin, Nicholas Gibbins, Sandro Hawke, Patrick Hayes, Jeff Heflin, Ziv Hellman, James Hendler, Bernard Horan, Masahiro Hori, Ian Horrocks, Jane Hunter, Francesco Iannuzzelli, Rüdiger Klein, Natasha Kravtsova, Ora Lassila, Massimo Marchiori, Deborah McGuinness, Enrico Motta, Leo Obrst, Mehrdad Omidvari, Martin Pike, Marwan Sabbouh, Guus Schreiber, Noboru Shimizu, Michael Sintek, Michael K. Smith, John Stanton, Lynn Andrea Stein, Herman ter Horst, David Trastour, Frank van Harmelen, Bernard Vatant, Raphael Volz, Evan Wallace, Christopher Welty, Charles White, and John Yanosy.
本文档是Web本体工作小组 (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/)作为一个整理充分讨论的结果。这个工作小组的参与人员有：Yasser alSafadi, Jean-Fran?ois Baget, James Barnette, Sean Bechhofer, Jonathan Borden, Frederik Brysse, Stephen Buswell, Jeremy Carroll, Dan Connolly, Peter Crowther, Jonathan Dale, Jos De Roo, David De Roure, Mike Dean, Larry Eshelman, Jér?me Euzenat, Tim Finin, Nicholas Gibbins, Sandro Hawke, Patrick Hayes, Jeff Heflin, Ziv Hellman, James Hendler, Bernard Horan, Masahiro Hori, Ian Horrocks, Jane Hunter, Francesco Iannuzzelli, Rüdiger Klein, Natasha Kravtsova, Ora Lassila, Massimo Marchiori, Deborah McGuinness, Enrico Motta, Leo Obrst, Mehrdad Omidvari, Martin Pike, Marwan Sabbouh, Guus Schreiber, Noboru Shimizu, Michael Sintek, Michael K. Smith, John Stanton, Lynn Andrea Stein, Herman ter Horst, David Trastour, Frank van Harmelen, Bernard Vatant, Raphael Volz, Evan Wallace, Christopher Welty, Charles White, and John Yanosy.
Change Log Since Last Call Release
自最后呼叫（Last Call）发布以来的修改日志
//译注：W3C文档的状态演进顺序为：工作草案（Working Draft），工作草案的最后呼叫（Working Draft in Last Call）, 候选推荐标准（Candidate Recommendation），建议推荐标准（Proposed Recommendation），推荐标准（Recommendation）//
- Added owl:Nothing to OWL Lite.
- 在OWL Lite中增加了owl:Nothing。
- Added pointer to last call document under title
- 增加了指向最近一次公开发布版文档的链接。
- Changed all links to owl-absyn to owl-semantics
- 把所有指向owl-absyn的链接修改为owl-semantics。
- Incorporated Lee Lacy's grammatical comments from public-webont-comments dated April 21, 2003.
- 采纳了Lee Lacy于2003年4月21日在public-webont-comments提出的语法方面的意见。
- Incorporated Lee Lacy's other comments: annotation properties, version properties, and other missing tags in 2.2 (which got reorganised as a result)
- 采纳了Lee Lacy的其他意见：注解属性，版本属性，和其他2.2节中遗漏的标签。
- changed hasOffSpring example to hasDaughter (request of Morten Frederiksen)
- 修改hasOffSpring例子为hasDaughter例子(应Morten Frederiksen的要求）。
- incorporated all Lasilla's comment, including replacing "machine readability" by "machine interpretability" and various typo's.
- 采纳了Lasilla的所有意见，包括把"machine readability" 替换为"machine interpretability"和其他的一些书写错误。
- Added sentence on lower complexity class of OWL Lite, as proposed by Jim Hendler
- 增加了关于OWL Lite的较低复杂度的句子(由Jim Hendler提出)。
- Added first sentence to section 1, after Sandro Hawke's comment
- 增加了第1节的第1句（在Sandro Hawke的意见后）。
- Restored link to style file
- 恢复了对样式文件的链接
- Added link to test document and May 1 version
- 增加了对5月1日的测试文档的链接
- Added references section
- 添加了参考文献那节
- Changed back to relative references to sections
- 修改回对各节的相对引用。
- Changed links to http://www.w3.org/TR/xx from previous versions with updates later to ...TR/2003/CR-xx-20030818/
- 把前一版本的链接http://www.w3.org/TR/xx修改为...TR/2003/CR-xx-20030818/。
Change Log Since Candidate Recommendation
自候选推荐标准（Candidate Recommendation）以来的修改日志
- Added Change Log since candidate recommendation.
- 增加了候选标准版以来的修改日志。
- Deleted Control Ms at the end of all lines.
- 删除了每行结尾的控制符。
- Incorporated Jeff Rafter's public webont comments (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/2003Sep/0000.html).
- 采纳了Jeff Rafter的公开的webont意见 (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/2003Sep/0000.html)。
- Updated Status, Document links, date of publication, etc. according to PR email (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Nov/0108.html) from chair.
- 更新了状态，文档链接和发表日期，等等。根据主席的PR 邮件 (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Nov/0108.html)。
Change Log Since Proposed Recommendation
自建议推荐标准（Proposed Recommendation）以来的修改日志
- Two broken links fixed - W3C icon was referenced by referring to local W3c expansion src="OWL Web Ontology Language Overview_files/ as was gif for author. Added full expansion to W3C icon (http://www.w3.org/Icons/w3c_home) and email gif (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/guide-src/Email.Deborah.McGuinness.gif).
- 修补了两个死链：W3C图标链接为W3c， src="OWL Web Ontology Language Overview_files/。增加了W3C图标的扩展后的链接(http://www.w3.org/Icons/w3c_home)和邮件gif(http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/guide-src/Email.Deborah.McGuinness.gif)。
- Removed control Ms at the end of every line introduced with new version transfer.
- 删除了由新版本转换器引入的每行结尾的控制符
- Added links to previous version in December 2003.
- 增加了对以前的2003年12月份的版本的链接。
- Updated document taking Lee Lacy's comments dated January 12, 2004. (Comments mostly small editorial changes, cell spacing change of 30 to 27 in table, ...)
- 根据Lee Lacy在2004年1月12日的意见更新了文档。（这些意见主要是一些小的修改，表格中格子的间距调整：从30到 27，...）
- Included Benjamin Nowack's editorial comments.
- 包含了Benjamin Nowack的编辑意见。
- Updated Reference format.
- 更新了参考文献的格式。
){kind=link}
和邮件gif(http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/guide-src/Email.Deborah.McGuinness.gif)。){kind=link}