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

Re: Proposal to close ISSUE-12

From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 01:44:30 -0400
Message-Id: <B16BEB1C-6CC8-45F8-8C18-7A5541403750@gmail.com>
Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
To: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
On Mar 18, 2008, at 9:32 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:

> 2/ Annotations on axioms that generate a fresh blank node put the
>    annotation on that blank node, as is done already for negative
>    property assersions
>    e.g.,  DisjointClasses(Annotation(a "bar") c1 c2 c3) becomes
>    	  _:x rdf:type owl11:AllDisjointClasses
> 	  _:x owl11:members SEQ(c1 c2 c3)
> 	  _:x a "bar"

> 3/ Other annotations on axioms that generate multiple triples (e.g.,
>    EquivalentObjectProperties) result in the triples being reified and
>    each annotation attached to each of the reified triples.

For such cases as EquivalentObjectProperties,  can we not add an  
extra fresh blank bnode to the set of entities and then use approach  
2? On the DL-side this can be ignored, on the full side, as  
existential it is satisfied by any other element of the set.

Received on Wednesday, 26 March 2008 05:45:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:03 UTC