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

Re: Names for top and bottom properties

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:17:09 +0100
Message-Id: <B467B4EF-29D3-4F4E-BBA5-578CCFCEF040@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
To: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>

On 30 Apr 2008, at 15:07, Ian Horrocks wrote:
> I would be fine with either Top/Bottom or Universal/Empty Property.
> Trying to dream up names that make sense in assertions of the form  
> A property B seems a bit pointless to me -- surely we don't expect  
> ontologies to contain this kind of assertion given that they are  
> either vacuous or inconsistent.

Additionally, while I might be mistaken, I don't know of any such  
names in other literature. Given their somewhat special status, it's  
probably wise not to throw up additional barrier to learning about  
them by coining entirely new *sorts* of name.

Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2008 14:15:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:04 UTC