- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
- Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 12:01:27 -0400
- To: Drew McDermott <drew.mcdermott@yale.edu>
- Cc: public-sws-ig@w3.org
On Sep 23, 2004, at 11:43 AM, Drew McDermott wrote: >> [Daniel Elenius] >> >> I think the OWL-S ontology needs some more disjointness axioms on a >> lot >> of its subclasses. >> ... >> In Expression.owl: >> DRS-Expression, KIF-Expression, SWRL-Expression - these should be >> disjoint. > > DRS expressions and SWRL expressions are XML Literals. It would be > nice to say that KIF expressions are string literals, but I seem to > remember some obscure reason why we couldn't do that. I don't so seem. Just add the allvaluesfrom xsd:string to KIF-Expresion. > Anyway, that > would make them disjoint. Indeed. > It's not completely obvious that DRS and SWRL expressions _are_ > disjoint. There's really no need for two separate notation systems > here. One encodes first-order logic and the other encodes logic > programming (roughly speaking), Very roughly. I would say that it's more true that SWRL is a subset of DRS (whereas logic programming isn't obviously so). > and one could argue that these should > be two subsets of the same notation system. Currently DRS borrows a > few classes from SWRL, and the overlap should be bigger. Agreed. Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Thursday, 23 September 2004 16:01:54 UTC