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

Re: possible semantic bugs concerning domain and range

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 15:04:24 -0500
Message-Id: <p05111b3ab9b51e47fb16@[65.217.30.172]>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org


......

>As far as OWL is concerned,
>
>	foo rdfs:range bar .
>
>should follow from
>
>	foo rdfs:range baz .
>	baz rdfs:subClassOf bar .
>
>This would fit in with the general OWL stance on these sorts of things.

Come on, I need more than that. What 'general OWL stance' ?? Does OWL 
differ so much from DAML+OIL that conjunctive information about 
property ranges and domains is now considered illegal? And what does 
one *gain* by making this change, in any case? Jeremy's entailment 
goes through, if properly expressed, with the current semantics for 
domain and range.

The above entailment strikes me as completely wrong, both formally 
and intuitively. For example, all properties, on this view, have the 
universe as their range. It basically makes range assertions into 
un-assertions: their only utility would be enable one to guess (not 
infer) from the lack of a range assertion that something probably 
wasn't in the range.

Pat

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
phayes@ai.uwf.edu 
http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Monday, 23 September 2002 16:04:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:52 GMT