Ontologies for the Semantic Web in Casl

  • Klaus Lüttich
  • Till Mossakowski
  • Bernd Krieg-Brückner
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3423)


This paper describes a sublanguage of Casl, called textscCasl-DL, that corresponds to the Web Ontology Language (OWL) being used for the semantic web. OWL can thus benefit from Casl’s strong typing discipline and powerful structuring concepts. Vice versa, the automatic decision procedures available for OWL DL (or more precisely, the underlying description logic \(\mathcal{SHOIN}(D))\) become available for a sublanguage of Casl. This is achieved via translations between Casl-DL and \(\mathcal{SHOIN}(D)\), formalized as so-called institution comorphisms.


Description Logic Unary Predicate Primary Concept Binary Predicate Class Axiom 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Swoogle search engine,
  2. 2.
    Andréka, H., Németi, I., van Benthem, J.: Modal logic and bounded fragments of predicate logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 27(3), 217–274 (1998)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (eds.): The Description Logic Handbook. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., Masinter, L.: Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic syntax. IETF Draft Standard (RFC 2396)  (August. 1998),
  5. 5.
    Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., Lassila, O.: The semantic web. Scientific American (May 2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bidoit, M., Mosses, P.D. (eds.): CASL User Manual. LNCS, vol. 2900. Springer, Heidelberg (2004), With chapters by Till Mossakowski, Donald Sannella, and Andrzej TarleckizbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bray, T., Hollander, D., Layman, A. (eds.): Namespaces in XML. W3C Recommendation (January 14, 1999),
  8. 8.
    Cerioli, M., Meseguer, J.: May I borrow your logic (transporting logical structures along maps). Theoretical Computer Science 173, 311–347 (1997)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    CoFI (The Common Framework Initiative); Mosses, P.D. (ed.): CASL Reference Manual. LNCS, vol. 2960. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dean, M., Schreiber, G. (eds.): OWL Web Ontology Language – Reference. W3C Recommendation  (February 10, (2004),
  11. 11.
    Fensel, D., Hendler, J., Liebermann, H., Wahlster, W. (eds.): Spinning the Semantic Web: Bringing the World Wide Web to Its Full Potential. MIT Press, Cambridge (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Genesereth, M.R., Fikes, R.E.: Knowlegde interchange format version 3.0 reference manual. Stanford Logic Group, Report Logic-92-1  (June 1992),
  13. 13.
    Goguen, J., Rosu, G.: Institution morphisms. Formal aspects of computing 13, 274–307 (2002)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Goguen, J.A., Burstall, R.M.: Institutions: Abstract model theory for specification and programming. Logic of Programs 1983 39, 95–146 (1992); Predecessor in: Clarke, E., Kozen, D. (eds.): Logics of Programs. Workshop Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA, June 6-8, 1983. LNCS, vol. 164. Springer, Heidelberg (1984)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Goguen, J.A., Meseguer, J.: Order-sorted algebra I: equational deduction for multiple inheritance, overloading, exceptions and partial operations. Theoretical Computer Science 105, 217–273 (1992)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Guarino, N.: Personal communicationGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Horrocks, I.: FaCT and iFaCT. In: Lambrix, P., Borgida, A., Lenzerini, M., Möller, R., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (eds.) Proceedings of the International Workshop on Description Logics (DL 1999), pp. 133–135 (1999)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F.: Reducing OWL entailment to description logic satisfiability. In: Fensel, D., Sycara, K., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.) ISWC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2870, pp. 17–29. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F., van Harmelen, F.: From SHIQ and RDF to OWL: The making of a web ontology language. Journal of Web Semantics 1(1), 7–26 (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lambrix, P., Borgida, A., Lenzerini, M., Möller, R., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (eds.) Proceedings of the International Workshop on Description Logics, DL 1999 (1999)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Masolo, C., Borgo, S., Gangemi, A., Guarino, N., Oltramari, A., Schneider, L.: Wonderweb deliverable D17. The wonderweb library of foundational ontologies and the DOLCE ontology. November 29, Preliminary Report (ver. 2.0, 15-08-2002) (2002)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mossakowski, T.: The heterogeneous tool set. University of Bremen, Available at
  23. 23.
    Patel-Schneider, P.F., Hayes, P., Horrocks, I. (eds.): OWL Web Ontology Language – Semantics and Abstract Syntax. W3C Recommendation  (February 10, 2004),
  24. 24.
    Sirin, E., Grove, M., Parsia, B., Alford, R.: Pellet OWL reasoner (May 2004),
  25. 25.
    Tobies, S.: Complexity Results and Practical Algorithms for Logics in Knowledge Representation. PhD thesis, RWTH Aachen (2001)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Weidenbach, C., Brahm, U., Hillenbrand, T., Keen, E., Theobalt, C., Topic, D.: SPASS version 2.0. In: Voronkov, A. (ed.) CADE 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2392, pp. 275–279. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Klaus Lüttich
    • 1
  • Till Mossakowski
    • 1
  • Bernd Krieg-Brückner
    • 1
  1. 1.BISS, FB3 – Dept. of Computer ScienceUniversität Bremen 

Personalised recommendations