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

Re: OWL Lite's restrictions on the use of the OWL vocabulary

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 12:46:58 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20030330.124658.125117106.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: yzqu@seu.edu.cn
Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org

From: "Yuzhong Qu" <yzqu@seu.edu.cn>
Subject: OWL Lite's restrictions on the use of the OWL vocabulary
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 22:53:25 +0800

> 8.3 OWL Lite [ In OWL Reference] says:
> 
> 1. Class axioms with an owl:equivalentClass statement. In these axioms both
> the domain and range should be either a class identifier or a property
> restriction.
> 
> 2. In value restrictions, only owl:allValuesFrom and owl:someValuesFrom may
> be used.(not explicitly state whether or not property-restriction type can
> be used )
> 
> 3. Only class descriptions of the class-identifier and property-restriction
> type are allowed at the righthand-side of domain and range statements for
> object properties.
> 
> 
> However. 2.3.1. OWL Lite Axioms [In OWL Abstract Syntax and Semantics]
> says:
> 
> A. axiom ::= 'EquivalentClasses(' classID { classID } ')'
> 
>     It means that only a class identifier can be the domain and range of an
> owl:equivalentClass statement.

owl:equivalentClass triples can arise from other parts of the abstract
syntax, so your claim does not follow from this.

> B. restriction ::= ...| 'restriction(' individualvaluedPropertyID 
>                         { 'allValuesFrom(' classID ')'}
>                         { 'someValuesFrom(' classID ')' } ... ')'
>     
>     It means that only a class identifier can be used for owl:allValuesFrom
> and owl:someValuesFrom constructs.

Yes, but this is not what 2/ above says.

> C. axiom ::= 'ObjectProperty(' individualvaluedPropertyID { annotation } {
> 'super(' individualvaluedPropertyID ')'}
>               { 'domain(' classID ')'} { 'range(' classID ')' }  ... ')'
> 
>     It means that only a class identifier can be allowed at the
> righthand-side of domain and range statements for object properties.

Agreed.

> Which one is the correct statement about the OWL Lite's restrictions on the
> use of the OWL vocabulary?

Well that is a good question.  As the editor of the S&AS document, I would
say that this document should be definitive.

> Yuzhong Qu

peter
Received on Sunday, 30 March 2003 12:48:29 GMT

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