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

Re: issue 68 - nonmonotonicity in mapping

From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:57:35 -0500
Message-Id: <8F967DB7-75C1-4716-B474-1767C48C76FC@gmail.com>
Cc: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, "Web Ontology Language ((OWL)) Working Group WG" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>

Actually, the QCR issue seems at least understood. The intention was  
really to discuss 68 as given. Ian wasn't sure whether 68 was only  
related to QCRs. So we want to understand the remaining non-QCR issues.
-Alan

On Feb 12, 2008, at 1:08 PM, Jeremy Carroll wrote:

>
> Ian Horrocks wrote:
>
>>                 + Issue 68 mapping rules are non-monotonic (more  
>> precisely, this relates to the mapping of the qualified  
>> cardinality constructors)
>
> The QCR issues are not the ones I wished to highlight in raising  
> issue 68, which is about e.g.
>
> "DOMAIN[op] expands to rdfs:domain if OnlyOP(op) = true, and to  
> owl11:objectPropertyDomain otherwise;"
>
> There is discussion of various possibilities for QCRs under
>
> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Full#QCRs
>
> which does agree with Peter's assessment that there are issues with  
> the current mapping rules for QCRs.
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2007Dec/0095
>
> I suspect that the agenda item is to discuss that rather than say  
> the DOMAIN[op] macro.
>
> Jeremy
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2008 15:57:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 13 February 2008 15:57:49 GMT