W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > April 2009

Re: [Fwd: Re: Invitation for review of POWDER documents (Last Call)]

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:59:03 +0200
Message-ID: <49F5C837.3050304@w3.org>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
CC: public-owl-wg@w3.org


Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> What about the some restriction?  Was our response not entirely correct?
> 
> It looks as if a some restriction would give the extra semantics that
> they appear to want, but I am having trouble reconstructing the correct
> context.
>

Well, we did put a disclaimer in our response that it is up to them to
decide what exactly the semantics is that they require...

What I/we did not realize is that the property they are talking about is
functional. Ie, by combining this fact with the 'some' restrictions they
ensure more than what we proposed (which just made it sure that the
values of that property is described with that ugly regex). So I guess
it is fine...

Ivan


> peter
> 
> 
> From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
> Subject: [Fwd: Re: Invitation for review of POWDER documents (Last Call)]
> Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:23:32 +0200
> 
>> My intention is to answer 'yes' to all the points, ie, that the WG is
>> satisfied. Any objections to that?
>>
>> Ivan
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: Invitation for review of POWDER documents (Last Call)
>> Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:12:40 +0300
>> From: Stasinos Konstantopoulos <konstant@iit.demokritos.gr>
>> To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
>> CC: Phil Archer <phil@philarcher.org>,	W3C OWL Working Group
>> <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
>> References: <49D9D592.9030201@philarcher.org> <49E6E3DA.3080501@w3.org>
>>
>> Ivan, W3C-WG, hi.
>>
>> On Apr 16, 2009, at 10:52 AM, Ivan Herman wrote:
>>
>>> - The reference should be to XSD1.1 and not XSD2:
>>>      http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-2/
>>>
>>> - 'At the time of writing, the OWL-2' should say "OWL 2" (ie, no  
>>> hyphen)
>>>
>>> - The reference to OWL 2 currently points to the OWL 2 Primer. We  
>>> think
>>> it would be better if it pointed at the (new) OWL 2 Document Overview:
>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview/
>> All updated, thank you.
>>
>>> - The semantic condition refers to rdfs:Resource for the domain of
>>> hasIRI. Although the description refers to an extension of the RDF
>>> semantics, it makes use of, say, owl:DatatypeProperty. Hence it may be
>>> stylistically better to refer to owl:Thing.
>> I am leaning towards removing the domain triple altogether, as
>> it is obviously gratuitous.
>>
>>> - The encoding of the condition in the example has several problems,
>>> partially due to some recent changes in OWL 2. These are:
>>>
>>>    - namespace changes (OWL 2 refers to xsd:pattern directly and not
>>> owl:pattern (OWL 2 reuses rdfs:Datatype instead of owl:datarange)
>> Updated.
>>
>>>    - we also think that the type of restriction used is inappropriate.
>>> owl:hasValue should refer to a single individual and not to a
>>> datatype/datarange. Based on the rest of the POWDER semantics, what  
>>> you
>>> probably have to use is owl:allValuesFrom, but this is something you
>>> have to decide, of course
>> Shouldn't it be owl:someValuesFrom to guarantee that the specified
>> value exists? Since hasIRI is functional, it also guarantees that all
>> values are also as expected. I am interested in OWL WG's reaction to
>> this.
>>
>>>    - the RDF mapping of facets is based on a list of blank nodes
>>> instead of the approach used in the current code
>>>
>>> The first example (the second has similar structure) should look
>>> something like:
>>>
>>> <owl:Restriction>
>>>  <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="....#hasIRI"/>
>>>  <owl:allValuesFrom>
>>>    <rdfs:Datatype>
>>>      <owl:onDatatype rdf:resource="...#string"/>
>>>      <owl:withRestrictions rdf:parseType="Collection">
>>>        <rdf:Description>
>>>          <xsd:pattern rdf:datatype="...#string">PATTERN</xsd:pattern>
>>>        </rdf:Description>
>>>      </owl:withRestrictions>
>>>    <rdfs:Datatype>
>>>  </owl:allValuesFrom>
>>> </owl:Restriction>
>> Indeed, modulo the owl:allValuesFrom vs. owl:someValuesFrom issue.
>>
>> Best,
>> Stasinos
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
>> mobile: +31-641044153
>> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
>> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf


Received on Monday, 27 April 2009 14:59:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 14:59:31 GMT