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

Re: ISSUE-8 (dataproperty chains): REPORTED: add chains ending with data properties)

From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 11:53:42 -0500
Message-Id: <EF85875F-86EC-475E-A783-6D02BB7F1E29@gmail.com>
Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
To: Uli Sattler <sattler@cs.man.ac.uk>

So wait, am I hearing that this feature *could* be part of OWL 1.1DL?
-Alan

On Nov 7, 2007, at 11:42 AM, Uli Sattler wrote:

>
> On 7 Nov 2007, at 15:23, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
>
>> Uli,
>>
>> Do the same decidability issues arise if only the last property on  
>> the chain is a datatype property?
>>
>
> not really, but semantically, it doesn't make sense to have  
> datatype properties anywhere else but in the last place of a chain:  
> a datatype value can only ever occur as the "filler" of a property  
> (or "have in incoming property edge"), but never be "subject" of a  
> property.
>
> Cheers, Uli
>
>> -Alan
>>
>> On Nov 7, 2007, at 8:32 AM, Jim Hendler wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> So we can allow this in OWL 1.1 Full, but not in OWL 1.1. DL  
>>> since it is only related to decidability which is the primary  
>>> differentiator between DL and Full.  So I propose that we include  
>>> this construct in 1.1 but make it clear that using it will take  
>>> you to Full.
>>>  Since this is on agenda for discussion at a meeting I cannot  
>>> attend, I state for the record that RPI would oppose any closure  
>>> of this issue that would not allow a property chain to end in a  
>>> datatype property in the RDF realization
>>>  -JH
>>> p.s. I realize now that my primary problem with the structural  
>>> document relates to this DL v. Full issue, and will take that up  
>>> in another thread.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 7, 2007, at 5:12 AM, Uli Sattler wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> a few days ago, I sent this email below as an answer to Owl Dev  
>>>> only, overlooking that I should have sent it to owl-wg as  
>>>> well...so here it is with a bit of delay, cheers, Uli
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 5 Nov 2007, at 15:13, Uli Sattler wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Michael,
>>>>>
>>>>> there are reasons why these sub-property chains are only made  
>>>>> up of object properties:  decidability in OWL (DL and 1.1)  
>>>>> relies on the fact that "datatype consistency" can be checked  
>>>>> for each object separately, without referring to other objects  
>>>>> and the values of their datatype properties. If we would need  
>>>>> to do this, we would more likely be in trouble, and would need to
>>>>>
>>>>> - be much more careful about what datatypes and datatype  
>>>>> predicates to allow without loosing decidability and
>>>>> - use more complex reasoning mechanisms that have, to the best  
>>>>> of my knowledge, only been described on paper and never been  
>>>>> implemented or tested.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, I can see your use case, but I don't think we know enough  
>>>>> about this yet.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you want to know more, check out
>>>>>
>>>>> Carsten Lutz and Maja Milicic. A Tableau Algorithm for  
>>>>> Description Logics with Concrete Domains and General TBoxes.  
>>>>> Journal of Automated Reasoning. To appear.
>>>>> http://lat.inf.tu-dresden.de/~clu/papers/archive/jar06.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>> Carsten Lutz. Description Logics with Concrete Domains - A  
>>>>> Survey. In Philippe Balbiani, Nobu-Yuki Suzuki, Frank Wolter,  
>>>>> and Michael Zakharyaschev, editors, Advances in Modal Logics  
>>>>> Volume 4. King's College Publications, 2003.
>>>>> http://lat.inf.tu-dresden.de/~clu/papers/archive/aiml4.ps.gz
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers, Uli
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2 Oct 2007, at 13:26, Michael Schneider wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It just stroke me that there seem to be only Sub/Object/ 
>>>>>> PropertyChains in
>>>>>> the current OWL-1.1 draft [1]. Does anyone know if there is a  
>>>>>> problem with
>>>>>> also having sub property chains of the form
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   SubDataPropertyOf(
>>>>>>       SubDataPropertyChain(R1 ... Rn-1 Dn)
>>>>>>       D )
>>>>>>
>>>>>> where Dn and D are DataPropertyS (having compatible datatypes  
>>>>>> as their
>>>>>> ranges), while R1 ... Rn-1 are ObjectPropertyS?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With such a SubDataPropertyChain, one could for instance  
>>>>>> translate rules
>>>>>> like:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   ?x hasFather ?y AND ?y hasFamilyName ?fn
>>>>>>   ==> ?x hasFamilyName ?fn
>>>>>>
>>>>>> with ?fn being an xsd:string, into an equivalent OWL axiom
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   SubDataPropertyOf(
>>>>>>       SubDataPropertyChain(hasFather hasFamilyName)
>>>>>>       hasFamilyName )
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In this case, the super property whould equal the final chain  
>>>>>> property (both
>>>>>> 'hasFamilyName').
>>>>>>
>>>>>> An example for a more general rule type (the analogon of the  
>>>>>> 'uncle' rule)
>>>>>> would be:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   ?g containsUser ?u AND ?u hasUserID ?i
>>>>>>   ==> ?g containsUserWithID ?i
>>>>>>
>>>>>> where ?g would stand for some user group. Here, the DataPropertyS
>>>>>> 'hasUserID' and 'containsUserWithID' differ from each other,  
>>>>>> because they
>>>>>> are intended to have a different meaning.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any ideas, if this feature has a chance to enter the family of  
>>>>>> OWL-1.1 (or
>>>>>> 1.2 :)) axioms? Or did I overlook some fundamental issue here?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] OWL-1.1 Semantics
>>>>>>     http://www.webont.org/owl/1.1/semantics.html#2
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider
>>>>>> FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik Karlsruhe
>>>>>> Abtl. Information Process Engineering (IPE)
>>>>>> Tel  : +49-721-9654-726
>>>>>> Fax  : +49-721-9654-727
>>>>>> Email: Michael.Schneider@fzi.de
>>>>>> Web  : http://www.fzi.de/ipe/eng/mitarbeiter.php?id=555
>>>>>>
>>>>>> FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe
>>>>>> Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe
>>>>>> Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959
>>>>>> Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
>>>>>> Az: 14-0563.1 Regierungspräsidium Karlsruhe
>>>>>> Vorstand: Rüdiger Dillmann, Michael Flor, Jivka Ovtcharova,  
>>>>>> Rudi Studer
>>>>>> Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther  
>>>>>> Leßnerkraus
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> "If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research,  
>>> would it?." - Albert Einstein
>>>
>>> Prof James Hendler				http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~hendler
>>> Tetherless World Constellation Chair
>>> Computer Science Dept
>>> Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY 12180
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 7 November 2007 16:54:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:13:27 GMT