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

RE: proposal to close ISSUE-102

From: Boris Motik <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:23:06 -0000
To: "'Michael Schneider'" <schneid@fzi.de>
Cc: <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <002c01c88526$84e3eb40$d012a8c0@wolf>

Hello,

Yes, this is correct. Although this is not a problem in view of OWL 1.1: the typing triples are just hints for the parser on how to
interpret a certain URI. If you really wanted to define terms, you should declare them.

I explained this in the three e-mails that I earlier identified.

Regards,

	Boris

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-owl-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-owl-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Michael
> Schneider
> Sent: 13 March 2008 15:29
> To: Boris Motik
> Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
> Subject: RE: proposal to close ISSUE-102
> 
> Hi Boris!
> 
> Boris Motik wrote:
> 
> >Hello,
> >
> >As for your first question, note that no OWL 1.1 ontology can
> >consist solely of a property: ontologies consist of axioms, so there
> >is no way for an ontology to contain an entity directly. An
> >ontology can contain a declaration axiom for a property. Then, the
> >translation of such an ontology into RDF would generate RDF triples.
> 
> It has been pointed out by Peter in a different mail that this topic is
> already covered by ISSUE-89. What I want to add here is that I believe that
> this is more than just a theoretical problem.
> 
> Imagine there is some "lightweight" OWL-1.0-DL ontology on the SemWeb, which
> defines a bag of terms in the following way: For each term only its URI and
> its "syntactical category" (whether it is a class, an object property, or a
> data property) is determined. But no further semantic relationships between
> these terms are specified, because the ontology's author does not need/want
> such restricting information.
> 
> An example:
> 
>   ex:Person rdf:type owl:Class
>   ex:Homepage rdf:type owl:Class
> 
>   ex:hasAuthor rdf:type owl:ObjectPropery
>   ex:hasHomepage rdf:type owl:ObjectProperty
>   ex:knowsPerson rdf:type owl:ObjectProperty
> 
>   ex:hasGivenName rdf:type owl:DatatypeProperty
>   ex:hasFamilyName rdf:type owl:DatatypeProperty
> 
> As far as I understand, this RDF graph will be translated into an *empty*
> Functional Syntax ontology by the OWL-1.1-DL RDF-to-FunctionalSyntax
> mapping. Is this correct?
> 
> Cheers,
> Michael
> 
> --
> 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 Thursday, 13 March 2008 16:24:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 March 2008 16:24:40 GMT