W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-dev@w3.org > April to June 2007

Re: Axiom annotations

From: Michael Schneider <m_schnei@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 21:49:08 +0200
Message-ID: <46267634.4090000@gmx.de>
To: public-owl-dev@w3.org

Hi all (especially those working on OWL1.1)!

Alan Ruttenberg wrote on Tue, 17 Apr 2007:

>  From http://webont.org/owl/1.1/rdf_mapping.html
> 
>> Axioms with annotations are reified. If s p o is the RDF  
>> serialization of the corresponding axiom without annotations given  
>> in Table 2 and the axiom contains annotations Annotation(apIDi  
>> cti), 1 ? i ? n, then, instead of being serialized as s p o, the  
>> axiom is serialized as follows:
>>
>> _:x rdf:type owl11:Axiom
>> _:x T(apIDi) T(cti)   1 ? i ? n
>> _:x rdf:subject s
>> _:x rdf:predicate p
>> _:x rdf:object o

Wouldn't the introduction of RDF reification into the OWL2RDF mapping 
exclude the reification vocabulary from being used in OWL axioms? Just a 
few days ago, we had an analog discussion for rdf:List and friends here 
in the "Restrictions on Bags and Seqs content" thread, remember? Until 
now, reification hasn't been blacklisted in

   http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/mapping.html#4.2

but then it would probably be.

Again, yet another widely used feature of RDF which is going to be 
forbidden in OWL. And don't forget those people who would like it to see 
reification completely removed from the RDF spec:

   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2007Jan/0088.html

I believe with reification deeply embedded in the OWL standard, all 
hopes of them will be off.

Perhaps, the simplest and most conservative workaround would be to use a 
"shadow version" of RDF reification, with same vocabulary and semantics, 
but from a different namespace:

   owl11:Statement
   owl11:subject, owl11:predicate, owl11:object

Best regards,
Michael
Received on Wednesday, 18 April 2007 19:44:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 27 March 2013 09:32:54 GMT