Re: does samePropertyAs entail...?

On Wed, 2003-08-27 at 12:39, Steven Gollery wrote:
> In DAML:
> 
> if there is a property P1 whose domain is class C1 and range is class C2

I presume you mean to use domain/range in the sense
of rdfs:domain and rdfs:range; i.e. C1 is *a* range
of P1 and C2 is *a* range of P1. i.e.
  forall X, Y, if P1(X, Y) then X in C1 and Y in C2.

and *not* the other fairly common usage of range, i.e.
	for all Y, if Y in C2 then there is some X with P1(X, Y).

> and there is a property P2 whose domain is class C3 and range is class
> C4
> and there is a statement that P1 is the samePropertyAs P2,
> 
> does it follow that C1 is the sameClassAs C3 and C2 is the sameClassAs
> C4,

no. Counterexample:
  eats rdfs:domain Animal; rdfs:range Food.# P1/C1/C2
  consumes rdfs:domain rdf:Resource; rdfs:range rdfs:Resource.# P2/C3/C4

Now we can have
  eats daml:samePropertyAs consumes. #i.e. same extension
but lots of things can be in rdf:Resource without
begin in Animal nor Food.



>  or does it just add a new class to the domain and range of each of
> the properties?

Umm... no, I don't think so; I'm not even sure what that means.

>  Or neither one?

It just means that P1 and P2 have the same property extension.
i.e. for every X and Y, P1(X,Y) iff P2(X,Y).

fyi, the OWL equivalent of daml:samePropertyAs
is owl:equivalentProperty.

cf

4.2.1 owl:equivalentProperty
http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-owl-ref-20030818/#equivalentProperty-def

and the links to the other parts of the specification
that discuss equivalentProperty in

Appendix C. OWL Quick Reference
http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-owl-ref-20030818/#appC


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/

Received on Wednesday, 27 August 2003 16:54:53 UTC