W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > April 2008

Axiomatic triples in OWL-R-Full?

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 11:32:44 +0200
Message-ID: <47FC8D3C.5040608@w3.org>
To: W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
(This may have to be raised as a more formal ISSUE. Also: it is _not_ my 
intention to get this problem solved before the upcoming publication round!)

The current OWL-R-Full does not include 'axiomatic triples' to be added 
to the resulting graph. What I mean is to add triples like


etc. See for the RDF Semantics for a bunch of those in RDFS, and Horst's 
paper on pD* for their OWL equivalents.

I am not saying we must have those; this is clearly touching upon the 
issue whether the core RDF/RDFS/OWL vocabulary is an object of discourse 
or not in OWL-R-Full. We _could_ therefore, explicitly say that those 
axiomatic triples are not defined in OWL-R-Full. That would mean that 
some (valid) RDFS or OWL Full entailements are not meaningful in 
OWL-R-Full, ie, OWL-R is also defined as a syntactic restriction v.a.v. 
OWL 2 Full and not only OWL 2 DL.

Again, I am not saying this is wrong. But the decision should be made 
explicitly and documented in the profile document as well. 
Alternatively, we could add those axiomatic triples for OWL-R-Full (but 
then the relationship between OWL-R-Full and OWL-R-DL becomes less clear...)



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, 9 April 2008 09:33:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:03 UTC