W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-comments@w3.org > September 2009

OWL 2 SS&FSS spec. - 8.1.4 wording sufficent?

From: Barclay, Daniel <daniel@fgm.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2009 15:40:36 -0400
Message-ID: <4AA804B4.5080807@fgm.com>
To: <public-owl-comments@w3.org>
Regarding the OWL 2 Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax
specification at http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/CR-owl2-syntax-20090611/:



Section 8.1.4, Enumeration of Individuals, says:

   An enumeration of individuals ObjectOneOf( a1 ... an )
   contains exactly the individuals ai with 1 ≤ i ≤ n.

Is that wording sufficient to specify whether a ObjectOneOf
construct that lists N Individual constructs (strings matching the
Individual non-terminal) implies that the enumerated set contains
N individuals or just implies that the set contains the N or fewer
individuals denoted by the N Individual constructs (e.g., if the
same IRI is specified twice (either with the exact same IRI
non-terminal or two different IRI non-terminals that represent the
same IRI))?

(I can't quite tell.  I don't yet know the structural equivalence
rules, to know whether they resolve that apparent ambiguity.

Also, it's not always clear when words like "individual" and "class"
refer to the structural objects (those given in UML) that
represent descriptions of individuals and classes, etc., vs. when
they refer to the described individuals and classes themselves
(which I would think would at least partly be left for the semantic
specifications (thinking of owl:sameAs)).)



Daniel
-- 
(Plain text sometimes corrupted to HTML "courtesy" of Microsoft Exchange.) [F]


Received on Wednesday, 9 September 2009 19:40:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 September 2009 19:40:24 GMT