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

Re: AllDisjoint in RDF mapping

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 11:31:51 -0600
Message-Id: <p06230905c204d509e883@[10.100.0.26]>
To: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Cc: public-owl-dev@w3.org

>At 10:44 AM -0500 2/23/07, ewallace@cme.nist.gov wrote:
>>Jim Hendler wrote:
>>
>>>Let me join Matthew in requesting this - note also that
>>>"DisjointUnion" doesn't answer this need in all cases - often we want
>>>to make things disjoint that either belong to many different classes
>>>or that we have disjunction of classes without wanting to imply that
>>>it is in some way complete.
>>>   -JH
>>
>>+1  on adding an AllDisjoint construct
>>DisjointUnion supports a common pattern used in a number of modeling
>>languages (including UML and EXPRESS), and no one from WebOnt would be
>>surprised that I am in favor of including it in OWL 1.1.  However, just
>>as Jim points out, there are many cases where one wants to specify
>>disjointness across a set of classes which don't make up a complete
>>covering.  Many new OWL users are surprised that classes aren't disjoint by
>>default.  Once they get over this, they start looking for constructs in
>>the language like DisjointUnion and AllDisjoint.
>>
>>-Evan
>
>
>
>actually, I do have a little problem with disjointUnion - the 
>problem is that this would be the first OWL feature (I think) that 
>combines two definitions at the same time -- so if I say
>
>Class A == DisjointUnion (B,C,D)     (with the obvious meaning, no 
>syntax implied)
>
>then I am asserting both the definition of Class A AND the fact that 
>B,C, and D are disjoint.  From a human point of view, I wonder if it 
>isn't better to avoid the syntactic sugar and have this remain as 
>two assertions
>
>Class A= Union(B,C,D)
>AllDisjoint(B,C,D)
>
>just seems to me that the clarity in the modeling would be clearer

+1

Pat


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC		(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502			(850)291 0667    cell
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Friday, 23 February 2007 17:32:12 GMT

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