W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > April 2002

Re: The Cannes Entailment [was: Coming to grips with the entailment put forth by Jeremy]

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 11:20:29 +0300
To: "ext jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com" <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
CC: <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B8F2DCFD.1424B%patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
On 2002-04-29 10:40, "ext jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com"
<jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com> wrote:

> [...]
>> There is an alternate way to fix this by rule without introducing
>> any variant properties.
> no, please see argument
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Mar/0151.html
> and correct with   eg:age rdfd:datatype xsd:number .

The problem with owl:UniqueProperty exists regardless of the
proposed closure rule.

If you have both

   Jenny ex:age "10" .


   Jenny ex:age _:x .
   _:x xsd:integer "10" .

in the same graph, you will still get the conflict with

   ex:age a owl:UniqueProperty .

since "10" will denote the literal and _:x will denote
the datatype value.

This is a fundamental incompatability with the coexistence
of the inline and bnode based idioms and owl:UniqueProperty,
and may even be construed as evidence of a problem with
literals always denoting themselves...


Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
Received on Monday, 29 April 2002 04:17:23 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:47:38 EDT