- From: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 00:18:52 +0000
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
On February 7, Jeremy Carroll writes:
>
>
> I propose that OWL users wanting to annotate their ontologies with no
> formal semantic entailments be recommended to use XML Comments.
Apart from any other problem, the result would inevitably be loss a
tool interoperability (see my comments in [1]).
>
> I propose that annotations within the RDF graph in OWL Lite and OWL DL be
> given the same formal semantic force as in RDFS.
As I said in [1], look at how comments are actually being used in
ontologies - it just doesn't make sense to try to impose RDF semantics
on natural language rubrics.
Ian
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0113.html
>
> A way that this can be done is articulated in [1] (under heading "OWL
> Lite/DL Entailment between RDF/XML documents").
>
> I propose that annotation properties be declared using an explicit type of
> owl:DatatypeProperty or owl:ObjectProperty, that they be syntactically
> restricted as in [1] to not interact with other aspects of the ontology,
> and that the production for individual in the abstract syntax be modified
> accordingly [i.e. the explicit {annotation} in the rule is no longer needed].
>
> Jeremy
>
> [1]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Jan/0523.html
>
>
Received on Saturday, 8 February 2003 19:19:47 UTC