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

Re: nonmon mapping and punning

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 09:29:30 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20080123.092930.133237890.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: jjc@hpl.hp.com
Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org

Which of the mapping rules are inherently non-monotonic (outside of the
QCR mapping)?

For example, making owl11:objectPropertyDomain be a subproperty of
rdfs:domain would remove the apparent non-monotonicity in the example


From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Subject: nonmon mapping and punning
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 14:34:53 +0000

> ISSUE-68 nonmonontonic mapping is one of the places where punning causes 
> a triple based implementation significant difficulty.
> An implementation of RDF and OWL that is based on SW principles, such as 
> Jena, may well have already made various design decisions such as:
> - triple based
> - triples can be more easily added than removed (monotonicity as a 
> general design)
> - adding triples does not side-effect in deletion of other triples.
> The non-mon mapping rules, which deal with ObjectProperty/DataProperty 
> punning issues, break these invariants, and cause significant difficulty 
> for such implementations.
> Notice this has clear business impact for HP, and is in no way an 
> 'ideological' perspective.
> Jeremy
Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2008 15:01:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:02 UTC