W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > June 2009

Re: Visualization of domain and range

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:13:03 -0500
Cc: public-lod@w3.org, public-semweb-ui@w3.org
Message-Id: <737014A0-98DB-4657-A9F1-B07971F11877@ihmc.us>
To: Tim Finin <finin@cs.umbc.edu>

On Jun 25, 2009, at 12:28 PM, Tim Finin wrote:

> Toby Inkster wrote:
>> On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 11:59+0200, Bernhard Schandl wrote:
>>> However many "newbies" to RDF and ontologies are confused by  
>>> this,  because the triple
>>>   foaf:Agent foaf:holdsAccount foaf:OnlineAccount .
>>> is actually not contained in the ontology.
>> What needs to be communicated is that:    [ a  
>> foaf:Agent ] ´╗┐foaf:holdsAccount [ a foaf:OnlineAccount ] .  
>> instead. Those triples are not actually in the ontology itself, but  
>> will
>> be found (or at least implied) in any instance data that makes use of
>> the foaf:holdsAccount property.
>
> The N3 statement '[a foaf:Agent] foaf:holdsAccount [a  
> foaf:OnlineAccount]'
> seems like an intuitive way, at least to this native English speaker,
> to say that the domain and range of foaf:holdsAccount are foaf:Agent
> and foaf:OnlineAccount, respectively.  I even like it.
>
> But it doesn't really say this, does it?

Indeed not. Your native intuition here is relying on the English  
construction of the 'anonymous subject', where "A man is mortal" means  
"Take a man - any man -  then that man is mortal." but not many  
formalisms use that technique.

>
> Running the statement through CWM produces:
>
>   <rdf:Description>
>       <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent"/>
>       <holdsAccount rdf:parseType="Resource">
>           <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/OnlineAccount 
> "/>
>       </holdsAccount>
>   </rdf:Description>
>
> Maybe I am missing some of the nuances of N3 and RDF, but I think this
> defines two anonymous individuals, one which is a foaf:person (among
> possibly other things) and another which is a foaf:OnlineAccount
> (among possibly other things) and asserts that a foaf:holdsAccount
> relations exist between them.

Exactly.

>
> I don't think this says anything about the domain and range of
> foaf:holdsAccount.

Well it implies that they are respectively not actually disjoint with  
foaf:person and foaf:OnlineAccount. But that's all it says.

> If we interpret this as OWL, I guess we can infer
> that the domain and range are subsumed by owl:Thing.

You knew that already, its tautologous.

Pat

>
> Or maybe I am missing something.
>
> Tim
>
>
>

------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973
40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Thursday, 25 June 2009 18:14:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:21 UTC