W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > June 2003

Re: incompleteness in RDFS closure rules

From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 14:33:41 +0200
To: pfps@research.bell-labs.com
Cc: phayes@ai.uwf.edu, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF803F852F.CF8C6386-ONC1256D3F.0044727F-C1256D3F.004502CC@agfa.be>


What about

{: rdfs:fyi :rdfs12a.
 ?Q rdfs:domain ?Y.
 ?P rdfs:domain ?X.
 ?P rdf:type :rdfcProperty.
 ?P rdfs:subPropertyOf ?Q} =>
{?X rdfs:subClassOf ?Y}.

{: rdfs:fyi :rdfs12b.
 ?Q rdfs:range ?Y.
 ?P rdfs:range ?X.
 ?P rdf:type :rdfcProperty.
 ?P rdfs:subPropertyOf ?Q} =>
{?X rdfs:subClassOf ?Y}.

while having

rdfs:subClassOf rdf:type :rdfcProperty.
rdfs:subPropertyOf rdf:type :rdfcProperty.
rdf:type rdf:type :rdfcProperty.

??

--
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/


                                                                                                                        
                    "Peter F.                                                                                           
                    Patel-Schneider"          To:     Jos De_Roo/AMDUS/MOR/Agfa-NV/BE/BAYER@AGFA                        
                    <pfps@research.bell       cc:     phayes@ai.uwf.edu, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org                          
                    -labs.com>                Subject:     Re: incompleteness in RDFS closure rules                     
                                                                                                                        
                    2003-06-07 11:26 PM                                                                                 
                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                        




From: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
Subject: incompleteness in RDFS closure rules
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 14:52:16 +0200

> Pat,
>
> What about generalizing rdfs12 to
>
> {: rdfs:fyi :rdfs12a. ?Q rdfs:domain ?Y. ?P rdfs:domain ?X.
>  ?P rdfs:subPropertyOf ?Q} => {?X rdfs:subClassOf ?Y}.
>
> {: rdfs:fyi :rdfs12b. ?Q rdfs:range ?Y. ?P rdfs:range ?X.
>  ?P rdfs:subPropertyOf ?Q} => {?X rdfs:subClassOf ?Y}.

These are not valid rules.

> Then the cases that Peter brought up are following
> (I've tested that and the other RDFS and OWL are
> in status quo, be it with some more steps).


peter


>
> --
> Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
> ----- Forwarded by Jos De_Roo/AMDUS/MOR/Agfa-NV/BE/BAYER on 2003-06-07
> 02:36 PM -----
>

>                     "Peter F.

>                     Patel-Schneider"            To:
www-rdf-comments@w3.org
>                     <pfps@research.bell-l       cc:

>                     abs.com>                    Subject:
incompleteness in RDFS closure rules
>                     Sent by:

>                     www-rdf-comments-requ

>                     est@w3.org

>

>

>                     2003-06-07 06:17 AM

>

>

>
>
>
>
>
>
>            rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:subPropertyOf xxx .
>            xxx rdfs:domain yyy .
>
> RDFS-entails
>
>            rdfs:Class rdfs:subClassOf yyy .
>
> but this does not come out of the RDFS closure rules.
>
>
>
>            rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:subPropertyOf xxx .
>            xxx rdfs:range yyy .
>
> RDFS-entails
>
>            rdfs:Class rdfs:subClassOf yyy .
>
> but this does not come out of the RDFS closure rules.
>
>
>
>            rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:subPropertyOf xxx .
>            xxx rdfs:domain yyy .
>
> RDFS-entails
>
>            rdf:Property rdfs:subClassOf yyy .
>
> but this does not come out of the RDFS closure rules.
>
>
>
>            rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:subPropertyOf xxx .
>            xxx rdfs:range yyy .
>
> RDFS-entails
>
>            rdf:Property rdfs:subClassOf yyy .
>
> but this does not come out of the RDFS closure rules.
>
>
>
>
Received on Sunday, 8 June 2003 12:23:58 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:57:54 EDT