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

RE: ISSUE-64 (obj-prop-chain rep): REPORTED: object property chains in triples: confusion of list with property

From: Boris Motik <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 18:31:47 -0000
To: "'OWL Working Group WG'" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000401c82ba3$9ba8be50$2711a8c0@wolf>

Hello Jeremy,

I am not sure I completely understand what the problem is here, so please let me just restate the problem.

I get the impression that you are worrying about a proper definition for the semantics of rdfs:subPropertyOf. The semantics of this
property is defined in RDF(S), so we can't redefine it in OWL. Thus, we would somehow need to ensure that the interpretation of the
first node in the rdfs:subPropertyOf is equivalent to the semantics of the property chain.

Is this a correct summary of the problem? If that's it, I have no problem with extending the RDF mapping.

Boris

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-owl-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-owl-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of OWL Working
> Group Issue Tracker
> Sent: 20 November 2007 14:47
> To: public-owl-wg@w3.org
> Subject: ISSUE-64 (obj-prop-chain rep): REPORTED: object property chains in triples: confusion of
> list with property
> 
> 
> 
> ISSUE-64 (obj-prop-chain rep): REPORTED:  object property chains in triples: confusion of list with
> property
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/
> 
> Raised by: Jeremy Carroll
> On product:
> 
> The rule
> 
>  SubObjectPropertyOf(
> subObjectPropertyChain(op1 ... opn)
> op)
> =>
> 
> T(SEQ op1 ... opn) SUBPROPERTYOF[op1,...,opn,op] T(op)
> 
> seems to give a resource which is a list a property extension.
> 
> Is this wise?
> 
> Would adding an additional property e.g.
>   owl11:propertyFromChain
> to link an unknown property to the list of properties that are being chained together be better.
> 
> If not, at what point in an OWL Full semantics does a list of properties get the semantics of a
> property chain?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2007 18:32:30 GMT

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