Re: Proposal to resolve ISSUE-86

• From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
• Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 11:09:11 -0400
• To: Michael Smith <msmith@clarkparsia.com>
• Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
• Message-Id: <20299F21-0212-4B38-8E5C-581DFF989013@gmail.com>

On Mar 26, 2008, at 9:45 AM, Michael Smith wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 21:30 -0400, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
>> RDF/XML serialization for anonymous inverse properties
>
>> I think it is beneficial to allow for anonymous inverses in
>> ObjectPropertyAssertion.
>
> Can you elaborate this?  If we don't have a real requirement for this,
> the simplest resolution* to ISSUE-86 is to require named object
> properties in object property assertions.

There are certainly a variety of cases I have personally run in to  
where there is a need for a property inverse for formulating an  
axiom, but the property  is not needed for query or for stating facts.

If it seemed like this was going to be a real problem I'd say drop  
it, but it doesn't seem that difficult to accomplish.

-Alan

Received on Wednesday, 26 March 2008 15:10:12 UTC