"Antoine Isaac" <Antoine.Isaac@KB.nl> wrote:
> Antoniou and Harmelen (2003) claim in passing that transitivity in owl
> properties is inherited - "No transitive cardinality restrictions: no
> cardinality restrictions may be placed on transitive properties (or
> their subproperties, which are of course also transitive, by
> implication"
Ah, yes, that was a painful mistake in the 1st edition of the Primer (and
in the derived chapter in the Ontology Handbook).
The new editions of the Primer contain the correct version:
"No cardinality restrictions may be placed on transitive properties (or
their *super*properties, which are of course also transitive, by implication)."
Sorry for the confusion this has caused...
Frank.
----
Received on Wednesday, 12 March 2008 13:54:56 UTC