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

Syntactic checking of weak v. fast graphs

From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 13:35:32 -0400
Message-Id: <p05111700b9b8f2cd3c7b@[]>
To: phayes@ai.uwf.edu
Cc: webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>

Let me start with an example:

  In D+O we have a separation of datatypes and object types.
If a user says
  x a daml:DataTypeProperty;
then it is "undefined" if the person also says
  x a daml:ObjectTypeProperty;
this "undefined" works as I understand it by saying in the reference 
document that you must pick one, and in the MT by assuming they are 

Suppose we now decide that we are going to allow things to be of both types.
In this case I see two ways we can do it -- one is we simply drop the 
comment in the reference manual.  Another is that we say in the 
reference manual that
"You can make something be both of those by saying
  x a daml:bothDataAndObject.

In both cases we get the same effect semantically, but there is a big 
difference - in one case we can know that if we do not see 
"daml:bothDataAndObject" then we have separation.

So for the issue of OWL vs. OWLinRDF (Fast Owl and Weak OWL)
  If we say OWLinRDF is defined as XXX, but if you don't use features 
YYY,ZZZ, and AAA then you are sure to be in FAST OWL.   Suddenly, we 
have a nice property - both Weak and Fast are WELL FORMED, but you 
can tell!

  So, if Fast OWL is actually a subset of OWLinRDF, and there was some 
way we could tell, we could be closer to having our cake and eating 
it too.

  that is my question

Professor James Hendler				  hendler@cs.umd.edu
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  240-731-3822 (Cell)
Received on Thursday, 26 September 2002 13:35:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:56:47 UTC