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

Re: new version of S&AS

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 10:44:01 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20030319.104401.86534513.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: schreiber@swi.psy.uva.nl
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org

From: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@swi.psy.uva.nl>
Subject: Re: new version of S&AS
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 13:37:47 +0100

> Peter,
> Below are a few detailed comments that came up when reading through 
> while revising  Reference.
> Guus
> 
> 
> 1. Sec. 2, sentence about OWL Lite
> 
> [[
>   This smaller language is a useful language that provides more than
>   RDF Schema
> ]]
> 
> make clear that OWL Lite is not just "more" but also "less" than RDF
> Schema (e.g. extension of a restriction)

Changed to

smaller language has been defined, called
<a id="owl-lite">OWL Lite</a>
[<cite><a href="semantics.html#ref-features">OWL Features</a></cite>].  This
smaller language was designed to provide functionality that is important in
order to support Web applications, but that is missing in 
RDF Schema [<cite><a href="semantics.html#ref-rdf-schema">RDF Schema</a></cite>].
(Note, however, that both OWL DL and OWL Lite do not provide all of the
feature of RDF Schema.)

> 2. Sec. 2.3 axioms
> 
> [[
> The restriction construct gives the local range of a property, how
> many values are permitted, and/or a collection of required values.
> ]]
> 
> "and/or" should be "or"

``and/or'' is correct, at least for OWL DL.

> 3. Sec. 4.1 mapping to RDF graphs
> 
> 
> 3.a. EquivalentClass:
> 
> Shouldn't there be a separate mapping rule for EquivalentClass
> with a single description?

No, except that I messed up the translation rules here, which should read

	...
	... [opt] 1<=i,j<=n

and this would then cover the single-description case.

> 3.b. Deprecation of datatypes?!
> 
> [[
> [DatatypeID rdf:type owl:DeprecatedClass]
> ]]
> 
> Do we allow deprecation of datatypes?
> Using owl:DeprecatedClass seems wrong, as this is a
> subclass of owl:Class and classes and datatypes are constrained to be
> disjoint.

Hmm.  I was not aware that owl:DeprecatedClass was supposed to be a
subclass of owl:Class.  This is not currently indicated anywhere in S&AS.

> 3.c. owl:DataRange
> 
> In the rule for "oneOf(V1 ... Vn)" the first triple:
> 
>    _x rdf:type rdfs:Class
> 
> should be replaced by
> 
>    _x rdf:type owl:DataRange

I thought that the resolution of last week did not include F1 which
concerns owl:DataRange.

> 4. Sec. 4.2 disallowed vocabulary
> 
> owl:DataRange is missing from this list

See above.

> -- 
> A. Th. Schreiber, SWI, University of Amsterdam,
> http://www.swi.psy.uva.nl/usr/Schreiber/home.html

peter
Received on Wednesday, 19 March 2003 10:44:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:58 GMT