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

Re: Problems with OWL 1 tests

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 07:23:32 -0400
Message-ID: <20090804.072332.166234593.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
CC: <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Yeah, sorry, I messed up reading the RDF.

Ignore what I said.

peter
 

From: Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Problems with OWL 1 tests
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 06:15:11 -0500

> Peter,
> 
>>> 20. WebOnt-someValuesFrom-001 (no species, no status)
>>> I am not sure about this one. It seems the conclusion ontology is
>>> messed up: it seems to want to use a blank node, but the RDF seems
>>> incorrect to me. The test has an invalid namespace for the semantics.
>>
>> This appears to be an attempt to test that OWL Full reasoners don't do a
>> very stupid thing that some OWL Full reasoner might want to do, namely
>> from
>>        r <= E p c
>> and
>>        i in r
>> conclude
>>        p(i,c)
>>
>> I don't see any blank node stuff in the conclusion, by the way.
>>
>> peter
> 
> The test implicitly uses a bank node. It contains:
> <rdf:Description rdf:about="premises001#i">
>         <first:p>
>            <first:c />
>          </first:p>
>     </rdf:Description>
> with p an object propery and c a class name (declared in the premise),
> which is parsed into the FSS axioms (namespaces omitted)
> ObjectPropertyAssertion(p i_:genid1)
> ClassAssertion(c_:genid1)
> To me that seems like what is intended. We have a description about
> the individual i saying that it has some p sucessor which is in c, but
> it does not use existential quantification, but rather an anonymous
> individual. HermiT gives the correct answer here, but I am still not
> sure whether this is the right way to state it in OWL DL with direct
> semantics.
> 
> Birte
> 
> -- 
> Dr. Birte Glimm, Room 306
> Computing Laboratory
> Parks Road
> Oxford
> OX1 3QD
> United Kingdom
> +44 (0)1865 283529
Received on Tuesday, 4 August 2009 11:23:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 4 August 2009 11:23:57 GMT