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

RE: timbl-03 collection clutter

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 07 May 2003 15:02:57 -0500
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1052337777.11683.495.camel@dirk.dm93.org>

On Wed, 2003-05-07 at 13:00, pat hayes wrote:
> >On Wed, 2003-05-07 at 10:40, pat hayes wrote:
> >[...]
> >>  >PatH - you bet its trivial to change Owl not to need them - can you
> >>  >propose specific text for the change?
> >>
> >>  Wherever any part of the OWL-XX syntactic conditions currently
> >>  mention triples of the form
> >>
> >>  xxx rdf:type rdf:List
> >>
> >>  that reference is modified to refer to triples of the form
> >>
> >>  xxx rdf:first yyy
> >>  or
> >>  zzz rdf:rest xxx
> >>  or
> >>  xxx rdf:rest zzz
> >>
> >>  which could all be called 'list triples of xxx' or some such phrase.
> >>  A minor edit to the text, no significant change to any actual
> >>  conditions.
> >
> >What about the name separation stuff?
> >
> >"the ontologies in O, taken together, provide a type for every
> >individual ID;"
> >  -- Web Ontology Language (OWL) Abstract Syntax and Semantics
> >Section 4. Mapping to RDF Graphs
> >  http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/mapping.html#4.1
> >http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-semantics-20030331/mapping.html#4.1
> >
> 
> Well, if I follow this right,

Gee, if you're not, then we're in bad shape; you're an editor
on that thing...

>  rdf:List is in the RDF disallowed 
> vocabulary, so any vocabulary which asserts anything to be of that 
> type would not be a separated vocabulary in any case, since it would 
> be using disallowed vocabulary as a class ID; and the same would 
> apply with the suggested modification since both rdf:first and 
> rdf:rest are also disallowed and hence cannot be property IDs. Either 
> way, lists had better not be mentioned in the ontologies in O.


Help?!??!

I'm losing my marbles.

I think I need a test case to look at.

> Pat
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 7 May 2003 16:05:07 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:57:28 EDT