W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > March 2003

Re: Why isn't FunctionalProperty a subClassOf owl:ObjectProperty?

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 05 Mar 2003 09:50:50 -0500
To: "Peter F. "Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
Message-Id: <1046875852.615.75.camel@jammer>

On Wed, 2003-03-05 at 09:43, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Why isn't FunctionalProperty a subClassOf owl:ObjectProperty?
> Date: 05 Mar 2003 09:16:05 -0500
> 
> [...]
> 
> Hmm.  If I can make decisions in OWL based on what might happen to RDF in
> the future, I have a lot of other changes that I would like to make.  :-)
> 
> > So I don't see any reason why owl:SymmetricProperty should
> > be constrained to be a subclass of owl:ObjectProperty.
> 
> Well any owl:SymmetricProperty in OWL DL would, of necessity, have an empty
> extension, so would not be very useful.

Ah. Hmm.... I see.

> In OWL Full, there is no need for the division of properties into
> individual-valued and data-valued.  In OWL Full, stating that property is an
> owl:ObjectProperty doesn't place any restrictions on the property,

Really? I guess I need to study this layering stuff more closely.

Is your presentation tomorrow likely to elucidate details like this?

"3:30 - 15:30 First afternoon session
    Semantic Layering. presentation by Peter F. Patel-Schneider, Pat
Hayes"
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/meetings/tech-200303/#L1130

> so there
> is no problem here either..

OK. Good.

> peter
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 5 March 2003 09:51:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:43 GMT