Re: What is it that's wrong with rdf:List [summary]

From: Norman Gray <norman@astro.gla.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: What is it that's wrong with rdf:List [summary]
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 09:47:47 -0500

[...]

> OWL: it turns out that OWL has rather cheekily hijacked rdf:List for
> its own purposes, encoding intersections and the like with lists (and
> that the reasons why this was unavoidable have become slightly
> obscure).  This means that an ontology which uses rdf:List ends up
> categorised as being OWL-Full.  It's not clear to me, by the way,
> under what circumstances things actually break, but it's worth noting
> (as Pat Hayes does) that a substantial fraction of the RDF and RDFS
> vocabulary is disallowed in OWL-Lite and OWL-DL
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/mapping.html#4.2>. 

[...]

My recollection is that rdf:List, etc., was put into the RDF vocabulary
at least partly in response to a request from the WebOnt Working Group,
so stating that OWL "hijacked" it is a bit harsh.

peter