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

Re: comments on RDF mapping

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 14:20:40 +0000
Message-ID: <47273DB8.2020601@hpl.hp.com>
To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
CC: Boris Motik <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, public-owl-wg@w3.org, Alan Rector <rector@cs.man.ac.uk>

Alan Ruttenberg wrote:

> Proponents of punning would label this:
> "OWL DL, now with more, but not all, of OWL Full goodness"

To some extent this is about labelling ....

I have been surprised how strongly some of my colleagues feel about this 
issue - my original take, and still my personal prejudice (but not the 
position I represent) is that punning is simply an area in which the DL 
implementations are incomplete.

I suspect, but have not checked, that many of the WG would be unhappy 
with such a position though - and since it would take me some effort to 
convince HP of it - I haven't given either task much thought.

- semantically using the same name for say, a class and an individual, 
has the consequences that one might expect from OWL Full
- the OWL DL profile is incomplete, in that, consequences resulting from 
punning are not computed (but still legal OWL consequences). i.e. an OWL 
DL reasoner may implement punning in the way that OWL 1.1 reasoners 
currently are doing so, but the resulting (lack of) entailments is 

Received on Tuesday, 30 October 2007 14:21:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:41:59 UTC