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

RE: declaredAs

From: Turner, David <davidt@hp.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:44:12 +0100
Message-ID: <86FE9B2B91ADD04095335314BE6906E8D6D553@sdcexc04.emea.cpqcorp.net>
To: "Bijan Parsia" <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: <public-owl-dev@w3.org>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bijan Parsia [mailto:bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk] 
> Sent: 14 August 2007 12:22
> On 14 Aug 2007, at 11:52, Turner, David wrote:
> > I realise that this point has been elaborated on later in 
> this thread, 
> > but I wanted to express my general agreement with it anyway.
> > Punning is
> > rather different from what OWL Full does,
> I don't know what you mean by "rather different". For me, for 
> example, "rather different" suggests *incompatibility*. 

Roughly speaking, yes. A user well-versed in OWL-1.0 (DL or Full) coming
across the example I gave might be surprised by its meaning in OWL-1.1.
I realise that the model theories are compatible from a strictly
mathematical POV, but surprising users by changing the meaning of
already-defined syntax is likely to be painful.

> Punning is, as far as I know, strictly weaker than Hilog or 
> OWL Full semantics.  

Right, but it was a design goal in 1.0 to have the DL semantics as close
to the Full semantics as possible. Punning is a further divergence,
because it's strictly weaker. AIUI a Hilog-like semantics would be
closer to what Full does.

> There are many graphs that are consistent in under simple 
> interpretations and inconsistent under RDFS semanatics. So 
> either this sort of being rather different is relatively 
> innocuous (at least ceteris paribus), or there's something 
> else that distinguishes them.

The difference was the observation that it is desirable to have a close
relationship between DL and Full semantics, unlike simple vs RDFS



Dave Turner  Cube T400, HP Labs Bristol, Filton Road, Bristol BS34 8QZ
davidt@hp.com          +44 117 3129104 (Work) +44 7962 811627 (Mobile)

Hewlett-Packard Limited. Registered No: 690597 England
Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
Received on Wednesday, 15 August 2007 10:44:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:58:15 UTC