W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > May 2002

4.5 InverseOf: a test case for mapping between ontologies]

From: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@swi.psy.uva.nl>
Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 15:15:31 +0200
Message-ID: <3CF625F3.67CAF741@swi.psy.uva.nl>
To: WebOnt WG <www-webont-wg@w3.org>

[Resent for archival purposes, as Dan's original message was for some
reason noy stored in the WG mail archive]

-------- Original Message --------
From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 28 May 2002 18:09:23 -0500
Subject: 4.5 InverseOf: a test case for mapping between ontologies
Resent-From: www-webont-wg@w3.org
To: www-webont-wg@w3.org


I think inverseOf is quite useful for mapping
between ontologies; here's
an example of how I understand it to work:

premise:

 :joe my:hasBrother :bob.

 my:hasBrother ont:inverseOf your:isBrotherOf.

conclusion:


  :bob your:isBrotherOf :joe.

full details, with namespaces and all that:

  http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/mapInvP.rdf

  http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/mapInvC.rdf

(for the cwm/N3-minded, see the mapInvR.n3 stanza
the http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/Makefile for
one way to run this test.)

So I propose to close this issue
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#4.5-InverseOf
by approving this test case and the
existing specification of inverseOf:

"if the pair (x,y) is an instance of P, than the pair (y,x) is an
instance of the named property."

http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/NOTE-daml+oil-reference-20011218#inverseOf-def

er... perhaps this should be clarified:

  if (I(P),I(Q)) is in the extension of
    ont:inverseOf and
  if (x,y) is in the extension of P
  then (y, x) is in the extension of Q.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 30 May 2002 09:19:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:50 GMT