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: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 22:42:37 -0500
Message-Id: <p05111b1ab9bad4984373@[]>
To: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org

>Seems to me we must have both if we're going to capture the notion 
>of range/domain as understood by database designers (object and 
>relational), object-oriented programmers, and most untrained users 
>(my suspicion - cannot prove it)
>  Borrowing Chris' idea of talking KR instead of OWL, here's some examples
>student is a person
>takeClass has range student
>faculty is a person.
>faculty and student are disjoint
>1) X TakeClass Y  ->  X a person, X a student
>2) X takeClass Y,  X oneOf (John Mary) -> X is Mary
>takeclass range teenager
>teenager a person
>teenager and adult are disjoint
>3) X takeClass Y -> X a person, X a teenager, X a student
>4) X takeClass Y, X oneOf (John Mary Sam), Adult(Mary) -> X is Sam
>Now, turning this back into OWL - I would expect these to be the 
>semantics that most people would expect - if either RDFS has this 
>wrong, or DAML has it wrong, we should fix it (either ourselves or 
>via RDF Core).  If these all hold, and the debate is elsewhere, then 
>I'm confused

The debate is elsewhere, Im afraid. Both sides support these 
entailments. However, let me ask you: do you think that your first 
four facts entail

takeClass has range (student union horses union oneOf( beta-lyrae, 
pats left foot))

? On the 'iff' stance, they do.


IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola              			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501           				(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ai.uwf.edu	          http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Friday, 27 September 2002 23:42:20 UTC

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