The OWL Working Group has published twelve Proposed Edited Recommendations

18 October 2012

The OWL 2 Web Ontology Language, informally OWL 2, is an ontology language for the Semantic Web with formally defined meaning. OWL 2 ontologies provide classes, properties, individuals, and data values and are stored as Semantic Web documents. OWL 2 ontologies can be used along with information written in RDF, and OWL 2 ontologies themselves are primarily exchanged as RDF documents. Comments on the Proposed Edited Recommendations are welcome through 15 November.

• OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Document Overview. This document serves as an introduction to OWL 2 and the various other OWL 2 documents. It describes the syntaxes for OWL 2, the different kinds of semantics, the available profiles (sub-languages), and the relationship between OWL 1 and OWL 2.
• OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax. The meaningful constructs provided by OWL 2 are defined in terms of their structure. As well, a functional-style syntax is defined for these constructs, with examples and informal descriptions. One can reason with OWL 2 ontologies under either the RDF-Based Semantics or the Direct Semantics. If certain restrictions on OWL 2 ontologies are satisfied and the ontology is in OWL 2 DL, reasoning under the Direct Semantics can be implemented using techniques well known in the literature.
• OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Mapping to RDF Graphs.This document defines the mapping of OWL 2 ontologies into RDF graphs, and vice versa.
• OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Direct Semantics. This document provides the direct model-theoretic semantics for OWL 2, which is compatible with the description logic SROIQ. Furthermore, this document defines the most common inference problems for OWL 2.
• OWL 2 Web Ontology Language RDF-Based Semantics. This document defines the RDF-compatible model-theoretic semantics of OWL 2.
• OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Conformance. This document describes the conditions that OWL 2 tools must satisfy in order to be conformant with the language specification. It also presents a common format for OWL 2 test cases that both illustrate the features of the language and can be used for testing conformance.
• OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Profiles. This document provides a specification of several profiles of OWL 2 which can be more simply and/or efficiently implemented. In logic, profiles are often called fragments. Most profiles are defined by placing restrictions on the structure of OWL 2 ontologies. These restrictions have been specified by modifying the productions of the functional-style syntax.
• OWL 2 Web Ontology Language New Features and Rationale.This document is a simple introduction to the new features of the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language, including an explanation of the differences between the initial version of OWL and OWL 2. The document also presents the requirements that have motivated the design of the main new features, and their rationale from a theoretical and implementation perspective.
• OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Quick Reference Guide. This document provides a non-normative quick reference guide to the OWL 2 language. It also provides links to other documents, including the OWL 2 Primer for language introduction and examples, the OWL 2 Structural Specification and Functional Syntax document for more details of the functional syntax, and the OWL 2 New Features and Rationale document for new feature descriptions.
• OWL 2 Web Ontology Language XML Serialization. This document specifies an XML serialization for OWL 2 that mirrors its structural specification. An XML schema defines this syntax and is available as a separate document, as well as being included here.
• rdf:PlainLiteral: A Datatype for RDF Plain Literals. This document presents the specification of a primitive datatype for the plain literals of RDF.
• OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Primer. This primer provides an approachable introduction to OWL 2, including orientation for those coming from other disciplines, a running example showing how OWL 2 can be used to represent first simple information and then more complex information, how OWL 2 manages ontologies, and finally the distinctions between the various sublanguages of OWL 2.
• OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Manchester Syntax. This Working Group Note of The Manchester syntax is a user-friendly compact syntax for OWL 2 ontologies; it is frame-based, as opposed to the axiom-based other syntaxes for OWL 2. The Manchester Syntax is used in the OWL 2 Primer, and this document provides the language used there. It is expected that tools will extend the Manchester Syntax for their own purposes, and tool builders may collaboratively extend the common language.
• OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Data Range Extension: Linear Equations. This Working Group Note specifies a syntax and semantics for incorporating linear equations with rational coefficients solved in the reals in OWL 2.

Learn more about the Semantic Web Activity.

Push API Draft Published

18 October 2012

The Web Applications Working Group has published the First Public Working Draft of Push API. This specification defines a “Push API” that provides webapps with scripted access to server-sent application data, for simplicity referred to here as "Push messages" as delivered by "Push services". Push services are a way for application servers to send messages to webapps, whether or not the webapp is active in a browser window. The specific method to be used by a webapp is either selected by the user through selecting a Web Intent Push Service provider, or by the browser. The Push API is defined to promote compatibility with any underlying delivery method. Learn more about the Rich Web Client Activity.

User Agent Accessibility Guidelines (UAAG) 2.0 Drafts Published

04 October 2012

The User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group (UAWG) today published updated Working Drafts of User Agent Accessibility Guidelines (UAAG) 2.0 and Implementing UAAG 2.0. UAAG defines how browsers, media players, and other "user agents" should support accessibility for people with disabilities and work with assistive technologies. UAAG 2.0 is updated to better address mobile devices and input by speech, touch, and gesture. See the call for review e-mail for a summary of changes. Comments are welcome through 9 November 2012. Learn more about the Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI).

Web Audio Processing: Use Cases and Requirements Draft Published

The Audio Working Group has published the First Public Working Draft of Web Audio Processing: Use Cases and Requirements. This document introduces a series of scenarios and a list of requirements guiding the work of the W3C Audio Working Group in its development of a web API for processing and synthesis of audio on the web. Learn more about the Rich Web Client Activity.

Web Intents Addendum - Local Services Draft Published

04 October 2012

The Device APIs Working Group and Web Applications (WebApps) Working Group have jointly published a Working Draft of Web Intents Addendum - Local Services. This specification is an addendum to Web Intents, that defines how Web Intents enabled User Agents can discover and communicate with local Web Intents Services. Learn more about the Ubiquitous Web Applications Activity, and the Rich Web Client Activity.

Network Service Discovery Draft Published

04 October 2012

The Device APIs Working Group has published a Working Draft of Network Service Discovery. This specification defines a mechanism for an HTML document to discover and subsequently communicate with HTTP-based services advertised via common discovery protocols within the current network. Learn more about the Ubiquitous Web Applications Activity.

About Google PageRank

PageRank is an analysis and ranking algorithm created by Larry Page and used in part by Google to assess the relative importance of websites. The algorithm assigns a numeric weighting from 0-10 (where 10 is the highest ranking) for each webpage on the Internet; thus PageRank denotes a site’s importance in the eyes of Google.

The PageRank is derived from a theoretical probability value on a logarithmic scale like the Richter Scale. The PageRank of a particular page is roughly based upon the quantity of inbound links as well as the PageRank of the pages providing the links. It is known that other factors, e.g. relevance of search words on the page and actual visits to the page reported by the Google toolbar also influence the PageRank. See, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PageRank

W3C Workshop: Making the Multilingual Web work

02 October 2012

W3C announced  the sixth MultilingualWeb workshop in a series of events exploring the mechanisms and processes needed to ensure that the World Wide Web lives up to its potential around the world and across barriers of language and culture. To be held 12–13 March 2013 in Rome, this workshop is made possible by the generous support of the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. Anyone may attend at no charge and the W3C welcomes participation by both speakers and non-speaking attendees. Early registration is encouraged due to limited space.

Building on the success of five highly regarded previous workshops in Madrid, Pisa, Limerick, Luxembourg, and Dublin, this workshop will emphasize the application of theory and technology to meet practical needs. The workshop brings together participants interested in the best practices and standards needed to help content creators, localizers, language tools developers, and others meet the challenges of the multilingual Web. It provides further opportunities for networking across communities that span the various aspects involved. We are particularly interested in speakers who can demonstrate novel solutions for reaching out to a global, multilingual audience. Registration is available online.

Two Drafts Published by the Tracking Protection Working Group

02 October 2012

The Tracking Protection Working Group has published two Working Drafts today.

• Tracking Preference Expression (DNT).This specification defines the technical mechanisms for expressing a tracking preference via the DNT request header field in HTTP, via an HTML DOM property readable by embedded scripts, and via properties accessible to various user agent plug-in or extension APIs. It also defines mechanisms for sites to signal whether and how they honor this preference, both in the form of a machine-readable tracking status resource at a well-known location and via a Tk response header field, and a mechanism for allowing the user to approve site-specific exceptions to DNT as desired.
• Tracking Compliance and Scope. This specification defines the meaning of a Do Not Track (DNT) preference and sets out practices for websites to comply with this preference.

Learn more about the Privacy Activity.

Web API Design Cookbook Note Published

02 October 2012

The Device APIs Working Group has published a Group Note of Web API Design Cookbook. This document captures common practices in designing APIs that fit well into the Web platform as a whole, using WebIDL. Learn more about the Ubiquitous Web Applications Activity.

W3C launches System Applications Working Group

02 October 2012

W3C announced today the launch of the System Applications Working Group, whose mission is to define a runtime environment, security model, and associated APIs for building Web applications with comparable capabilities to native applications. See the System Applications Working Group Charter for more information, and read more about the Ubiquitous Web Domain.

W3C Workshop: Web Performance

28 September 2012

W3C announced a Workshop on Web Performance, 8 November, hosted by Google at their Mountain View, California campus. As the Open Web Platform expands, the need for high performance implementation has grown, particularly on mobile devices. Participants will examine a broad range of performance issues and how they might be addressed. There is no fee to participate in this Workshop and W3C Membership is not required. All participants are required to submit a statement of interest by 29 October. Learn more about W3C's Web Performance Working Group, which also invites people to share performance issues via their survey on Open Web Platform Performance Priorities.