W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > February 2003

Re: OWL, XML-RDF and Imports

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 06:52:34 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20030217.065234.101260896.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: seanb@cs.man.ac.uk
Cc: jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com, www-webont-wg@w3.org

From: Sean Bechhofer <seanb@cs.man.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: OWL, XML-RDF and Imports
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 10:48:18 +0000 (GMT Standard Time)


> Peter's redefinition:
> [[
> DEFINITION:  An RDF/XML document is an OWL DL ontology if
> 1/ the RDF graph resulting from parsing it as an RDF/XML document forms
> the
>    translation of a single OWL ontology in the abstract syntax;
> 2/ all RDF/XML documents that it imports are also in OWL DL ontology form;
>    and
> 3/ the imports closure of the document
>    a/ does not use any URI reference as more than one of an ontology name,
>       a classID, a datatypeID, an individualID, a datavaluedPropertyID, an
>       individualvaluedPropertyID, or an annotationPropertyID; and
>    b/ does not use any of the URI references from the RDF, RDFS, or OWL
>       namespaces that are mentioned in the RDF or OWL semantics except for
>       the OWL datatypes, the OWL built-in classes, and the OWL built-in
>       annotation properties.
> ]]
> would, I think, alleviate my concerns. The definition seems to be
> silent regarding the requirement for everything to be typed,
> though. Is this deliberate?
>        Sean

Somewhat deliberate.  It depends on the mapping rules to determine what
needs to be typed and what doesn't.  Currently this means that classes,
datatypes, datatype properties, object properties, named ontologies, and
annotation properties need to be typed and individuals don't.  I would
prefer to loosen this to allow ontologies and annotation properties to not
be typed. 

Received on Monday, 17 February 2003 06:52:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:56:51 UTC