W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > October 2000

Re: Comments on Annotated DAML Ontology Markup, rev 1.6, date 2000/10/07

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 01:31:58 -0500
Message-ID: <39E4095E.E9075D03@w3.org>
To: Grit Denker <denker@csl.sri.com>
CC: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
Grit Denker wrote:
[...]
> Questions/comments on http://www.daml.org/2000/10/daml-ont.daml :
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> o I found it confusing that in some places one can find
> 
>    <domain resource="#Class"/>
> 
>   and in others
> 
>    <domain resource="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class"/>

The syntax of resource="..." is just like href="...".
It's a URI (er... URI reference, to be exact).

To point within the same document, you can use "#Class",
but to point to some other document, you have
to use "...rdf-schema#Class".

See the URI spec and the intro to URIs
in the references/suggested reading section.
http://www.daml.org/2000/10/daml-walkthru#URI1

>   just to find out at the end of the document that
> 
>    <Class ID="Class">
>      <equivalentTo resource="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class"/>
>    </Class>

Er... perhaps your question is not about URI reference
syntax... perhaps you're saying that you're familiar
with RDF schema, and it would have been nice to see
this equivalence stated at the top, rather than the bottom?

The present organization of DAML-ONT is intended
to hide a certain amount of RDF/RDFS stuff from view.

Ah... I also see that I used both forms of reference
in the same file. Sorry... fixed.

$Id: daml-ont.daml,v 1.2 2000/10/11 06:30:02 connolly Exp $
Diffs attached, but I haven't uploaded this version
to daml.org.

> o Typo:
>     <Property ID="disjointUnionOf">
>       ...
>       <comment>
> 
>        for disjointUnionOf(X,Y)  read: ...
>            !!!!!!!!
> 

I don't see the typo. Oh! the typo is in the daml-ont,
and you've given the correction... ok...
fixed in v1.2...

> o  Typo:
>     <Property ID="intersectionOf">
>       <comment>
> 
>        for intersectionOf(X,Y)  read: ...
>            !!!!!!!!

Thanks. Fixed...

> o Typo:
>     <Property ID="item">
>        <comment> for item(L,I) read : I is an item in L;
>                           !!!!
>                  either first(L,I) or item(R,I) where...
>                                            !!!!
> 
>     {because <domain resource="#List"/>}

er... yeah, that is backwards. OK... fixed the comment.

> o I was wondering whether all the facets of properties
>   (e.g., cardinality, maxCardinality, ...) should have
> 
>     <domain resource="#Property"/>

Probably.

>   Is that the default?

No... there is no default; i.e. if you know
domain(p, c) and you see p(x, y) then you
can conclude type(x, c); but if you don't
know any c for which domain(p, c), you just
can't come to any such conclusion.

>   Did I miss something?

No... I just got lazy.


>   Moreover, shouldn't there also be <range ...> definitions for
>   all of them? For instance,
> 
>   <property ID="inverseOf">
>      <range resource="#Property"/>
>      ...
>   </property>

Yeah, that's a reasonable thing to say... fixed.

>   (and similar numbers for the cardinality properties?)

Er... I'm still noodling on some issues around numbers.
See
http://www.daml.org/2000/10/daml-num.daml


> o Typo:
>     <Property ID="toValue">
>        ....
>        <comment>for toValue(R, V), read: ...
>                                !!!

Thanks. fixed.

> o Why is there no range constraint for the "toClass"  property, like
>   <Property ID="toClass">
>     ...
>     <range resource="#Class"> ?
> 
>    Is that default?

Nope; I've added <range resource="#Class">.

> 
> o Typo:
>     <Property ID="qualifiedBy">
>       ...
>       <comment> for qualifiedBy(C, Q), read: ...
>                                   !!!

Thanks. fixed.

> o Typo:
>     <Property ID="hasValue">
>       ...
>       <comment> for hasValue(Q, C), read: ... qualification to C.</comment>
>                                                               !!!

fixed.

> o Assertion by reference, importing

[I'll answer this in a separate message.]


> o There were alternative IDs suggested for the property "equivalentTo":
>   equals, equiv, renames

[that one too.]


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 11 October 2000 02:32:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:37 GMT