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

Re: comment on Profile document: Missing rule in OWL-R?

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 05:39:00 +0200
Message-ID: <480D5DD4.60302@w3.org>
To: Alan Wu <alan.wu@oracle.com>
CC: W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Alan,

the other Alan asked not to discuss unaccepted issues yet, so I am not 
sure it is o.k. to go into this at this time:-(

Ivan

Alan Wu wrote:
> Ivan,
> 
> Ivan Herman wrote:
>> Hi Alan (and the other editors of the document, actually...:-)
>>
>> In the meantime I found a similar issue with Rule #4 and #5: those two 
>> rules are on Object and Datatype Properties, but a similar rule might 
>> be necessary for rdfs Properties, too.
>>
>> However: after all, I think we should _not_ just massage the rule set. 
>> I think we should look at the proposed Issue 116 first (if the Working 
>> Group accepts it, that is).
>>
>> Indeed, it must be decided whether we want axiomatic triples in the 
>> first place and, if the decision on that question is 'yes', then which 
>> axiomatic triples we are talking about. Those may influence the rule 
>> set as it is now. Eg, not only could we add an axiomatic triple saying 
>> (owl:Class owl:sameAs rdfs:Class) for the Full version (which would 
>> solve the problem I raised), but by adding things like
>>
>> (rdfs:subClassOf rdf:type owl:TransitiveProperty)
>>
>> some of the rules in the current rule set become superfluous.
>>
>> But... the whole issue of how OWL-R-Full and OWL-R-DL relate to one 
>> another becomes then an issue, and we should carefully consider that, 
>> too... Ie, this warrants a more fundamental discussion in my view...
>>
> Do you have an example which shows the relationship between OWL-R-Full & 
> OWL-R-DL becomes problematic after adding some axiomatic triples?
> 
> Thanks,
> Zhe
> 

-- 

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 Tuesday, 22 April 2008 03:39:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 April 2008 03:39:37 GMT