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

Re: ISSUE-2 (allDisjoint-RDF): No syntax for AllDisjoint in RDF mapping

From: Uli Sattler <sattler@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 19:27:21 +0000
Message-Id: <C824B6A8-9356-469A-9BE6-C79A028944DF@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
To: "Boris Motik" <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>

On 7 Nov 2007, at 18:24, Boris Motik wrote:

> Hello,
> There are other n-ary constructs in the functional spec that are  
> mapped into binary constructs in the RDF: equivalences on classes,
> disjointness and equivalences on properties, and sameAs and  
> disjointFrom on individuals.
> It might make sense to broaden the discussion to these features as  
> well.
> Thus, you could view the problem as "whether the RDF mapping should  
> always preserve the arity of the construct in the functional
> spec".

so, i understand that we are asking whether to translate, for example

disjointClasses(A B C) into

- (A disjoint B), (B disjoint C), (A disjoint C), thereby not  
preserving arity or

- (A disjointWithList (B disjointWithList C)) or such like....

Is this it?

Cheers, Uli

> Regards,
> 	Boris
Received on Wednesday, 7 November 2007 19:27:37 GMT

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