W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > June 2010

Re: Subjects as Literals, [was Re: The Ordered List Ontology]

From: Jeremy Carroll <jeremy@topquadrant.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 15:45:35 -0700
Message-ID: <4C2BC90F.6060201@topquadrant.com>
To: Jiří Procházka <ojirio@gmail.com>
CC: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, nathan@webr3.org, Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
Jiří Procházka wrote:
>
> I wonder, when using owl:sameAs or related, to "name" literals to be
> able to say other useful thing about them in normal triples (datatype,
> language, etc) does it break OWL DL 
yes it does

> (or any other formalism which is
> base of some ontology extending RDF semantics)?

Not OWL full
>  Or would it if
> rdf:sameAs was introduced?
>   

It would still break OWL DL
> Best,
> Jiri
>   
OWL DL is orthogonal to this issue. The OWL DLers already prohibit 
certain RDF - specifically the workaround for not having literal as 
subjects. So they are neutral.
I reiterate that I agree whole-heartedly with the technical arguments 
for making this change; however the economic case is missing.

Jeremy
Received on Wednesday, 30 June 2010 22:46:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:36 GMT