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

Re: ISSUE-3: REPORTED: Lack of anonymous individuals

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 10:26:41 +0100
Message-ID: <474D3451.4040102@w3.org>
To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: Boris Motik <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, "'Web Ontology Language (OWL) Working Group WG'" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Hi Bijan,

just for my understanding:

Bijan Parsia wrote:
>>
>> - drop anonymous individuals explicitly in OWL 1.1 DL (and perhaps say
>> in some note that such individuals can be dealt with for all
>> practical intents and purposes by Skolemization), or
> 
> I find manual Skolemization to be a bit of a non-starter. People
> migrating from RDF use BNodes rather freely, so I imagine pellet (for
> example) will always have a mode wherein it treats them as skolem
> constants. I also imagine that this will be the default setting.
> Furthermore, that's certainly how I propose to deal with them when
> querying with SPARQL/OWL.
> 

what you mean is that if I write OWL1.1 DL statements (including, to
refer to my previous concern, in some some of the simple tractable
fragment dialect) in, God forbid, RDF/XML and/or Turtle, using
_syntactically_ blank nodes, then a tool like Pellet would transform
them on the fly into Skolem, ie, assign some unique URI-s in the
process? And that is how conformance for tools would be defined for DL
reasoners?

This would certainly answers a concern I had.

Thanks

Ivan


-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf


Received on Wednesday, 28 November 2007 09:26:44 GMT

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