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

Property Value Ranges

From: John McClure <jmcclure@hypergrove.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 11:56:58 -0700
To: "Owl Dev" <public-owl-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <MGEEIEEKKOMOLNHJAHMKEEMDEFAA.jmcclure@hypergrove.com>

I'm uncomfortable with the answer given for axioms about instance property
values -- the answer used a <Restriction> element which is mechanism for class
definitions. I'm concerned about the impact of this approach on user-queries of
a knowledge-base and also on its maintenance by developers

Let's consider for a moment that one wants to say an instance 'a' has a property
'P' that has an exclusive range of values a-z, with the exception of value 'm'
(and, being exclusive, of the endpoints). To me, that is a simple matter of

<owl:Thing rdf:about="#a">
     <P verb='has'>
	<Minimum verb='has' rdf:value='a'/>
	<Maximum verb='has' rdf:value='z'/>
	<Value verb='hasNot' rdf:value='a'/>
	<Value verb='hasNot' rdf:value='z'/>
	<Value verb='hasNot' rdf:value='m'/>

Would someone provide the OWL 1.1 equivalent coding (in XML)? I'm wondering if
the values for P are spread across <rdf:type> and <P> element structures rather
than packaged in a single element as shown above.

Though feasible, using <rdf:type> elements to specify property values that an
instance *does or doesn't have* seems strange from the perspective that it's
hard to understand the actual significance of the extent of a class so obviously

John McClure
Received on Wednesday, 22 August 2007 18:56:33 UTC

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