W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > December 2007

Re: ISSUE-47 (compound keys): REPORTED: 6.2-Compound Keys

From: Uli Sattler <sattler@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2007 11:12:54 +0000
Message-Id: <3A394BF5-1B80-4A0E-A1E1-241CE1C4C001@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk, hendler@cs.rpi.edu, public-owl-wg@w3.org
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>

...sorry for the late reply: I thought that this feature is harmless  
provided we treat it as follows: say, we have that properties p1,...,  
p7 are keys for a class C. Then, whenever we find two individuals  
explicitly known in the ontology, say x and y,  that coincide on  
their known values for p1, and p2 and ... p7, then we infer that x  
and y are identical. We could implement this feature with this  
semantics via a translation into DL-safe rules, which some of the  
reasoners already implement.

Cheers, Uli

On 3 Dec 2007, at 09:32, Jeremy Carroll wrote:

>
> Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>
>> In any case, there should probably be some explanation of why the  
>> issue
>> is not being considered, and "no implementions" sounds acceptable  
>> to me.
>
> I had hoped for a little bit more - four years ago when we  
> postponed this, we were told that work was being done in the area.
>
> This feature is a feature that many of HP's users would like, and  
> which HP would be likely to support (in an OWL Full sort of way) if  
> there was an appropriate construct.
>
> I note that relational databases have routinely supported a similar  
> functionality for decades.
>
> So - please could someone summarize the current state of research  
> on this issue?
>
> thanks
>
> Jeremy
>
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 3 December 2007 11:13:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:13:29 GMT