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

RE: Axiomatic triples in OWL-R-Full?

From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 12:18:16 +0200
Message-ID: <0EF30CAA69519C4CB91D01481AEA06A0803E18@judith.fzi.de>
To: "Ivan Herman" <ivan@w3.org>
Cc: "W3C OWL Working Group" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Hi, Ivan!

This is a good observation, and I think an issue should be raised for it.

The question whether to include axiomatic triples or not depends on whether we want the semantics of OWL R Full to be an upper semantics of RDFS or not.

Just one technical/theoretical remark for the moment: To receive strict RDFS compatibility, it is necessary to include all of the following axiomatic triples, for every natural language n:

>From RDF semantics:

   rdf:_n rdf:type rdf:Property

>From RDFS semantics:

   rdf:_n rdf:type rdfs:ContainerMembershipProperty
   rdf:_n rdfs:domain rdfs:Resource
   rdf:_n rdfs:range rdfs:Resource

Obviously, these are *infinitely* many axiomatic triples. In practice this would mean that complete OWL R Full conformance would probably not be possible to achieve. So it would be up to the implementors to decide about the intended conformance level of their product.

Cheers,
Michael

Ivan Herman wrote:

>(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
>
>(owl:FunctionalProperty,rdfs:subClassOf,rdf:Property)
>(rdfs:subPropertyOf,rdfs:domain,rdf:Property)
>
>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
>
>
>-- 
>
>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
>

--
Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider
FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik Karlsruhe
Abtl. Information Process Engineering (IPE)
Tel  : +49-721-9654-726
Fax  : +49-721-9654-727
Email: Michael.Schneider@fzi.de
Web  : http://www.fzi.de/ipe/eng/mitarbeiter.php?id=555

FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe
Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe
Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959
Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
Az: 14-0563.1 Regierungspräsidium Karlsruhe
Vorstand: Rüdiger Dillmann, Michael Flor, Jivka Ovtcharova, Rudi Studer
Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus


Received on Wednesday, 9 April 2008 10:19:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 April 2008 10:19:01 GMT