Re: [SKOS] OWL DL compatibility

Hi Antoine, Dan,

> - the need for annotating owl:Class is not obvious for me (typical 
> thesauri in Cultural Heritage do not pretend to be ontologies). Perhaps 

I think Alistair's idea was to enable usage of SKOS properties to 
describe OWL classes in proper ontologies.

There is a problem in OWL DL with recording different kinds of labels 
(e.g. which to use for display or not, which is the vernacular label, 
etc.) because rdfs:label is an AnnotationProperty, which cannot be 
specialized with rdfs:subPropertyOf. However, this would be the 
preferred way to maintain semantic interoperability (you can always 
dumb down to rdfs:label).

SKOS might fill this gap, but it can only do so if SKOS proeprties are 
not restricted to skos:Concept and are NOT AnnotationProperties (else 
they could not be specialized themselves as might be expected). But if 
they are to be applied to _classes_ in DL, they MUST be 
AnnotationProperties...

Dilemma, dilemma...

Mark.
-- 
  Mark F.J. van Assem - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
        markREMOVE@cs.vu.nl - http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mark