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

Re: Proposed response to Hugh WInkler - allDisjoint

From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 08:46:00 -0400
Message-Id: <p05200f04bb90a8163e63@[]>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, www-webont-wg@w3.org
As tempted as I am to reopen the issue of allDisjoint I won't (as I 
seem to be the main proponent).  However, the result of our LC 
discussion was to add section
to the Guide.  Any answer to Hugh should direct him to this section 
in our document, not just to a test case.

I would also like to suggest that it is becoming clear that many 
people are clearly going to the reference document without reading 
the guide, I would therefore like to suggest to Guus and Mike a 
positive editorial change might be for the Reference to put a point 
to the Guide link above in section 3.2.4 (DisjointWith) and/or in 
section 5.2.3 (AllDifferentFrom)

Given that this came up so often in our LC comments, and was 
discussed at length by the WG, we should do a better job of making 
sure people can find it (so it doesn't come up again at PR)

At 2:20 PM +0300 9/19/03, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>Hugh was not aware of the solution in test I5.21 002, perhaps this should be a
>Dear Hugh Winkler,
>the WebOnt Working Group has considered this problem in detail.
>We were aware that a few OWL users will have large numbers of disjoint
>classes, when we last formally considered this (during last call).
>As part of the resolution in last call we added the following test to OWL Test
>Cases, which illustrates an O(N) construction equivalent to "owl:allDisjoint"
>>  For the 337 terms in our hypothetical UBL Library ontology, we would
>>  enter 56616 <owl:disjointWith> statements. Using the proposed
>>  <owl:allDisjoint> syntax would require 337 statements.
>Recalling the formulae from our group discussion:
>syntax illustrated in test I5.21-002     
>2028 triples
>56953 triples
>"owl:allDisjoint", like owl:AllDistinct
>1350 Triples
>(In all three, I include the 337 triples needed to declare the classes
>xxx rdf:type owl:Class; in the last I include the triples needed for the
>rdf:List construct).
>Thus, while owl:allDisjoint is more efficient, it is by a factor of 50%,
>rather than an order of magnitude.
>The Working Group does not intend to make any changes in light of your
>Please reply indicating whether this is a satisfactory response, copying
>thanks, and please feel free to make more comments,
>Jeremy Carroll

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	  *** 240-277-3388 (Cell)
http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler      *** NOTE CHANGED CELL NUMBER ***
Received on Friday, 19 September 2003 08:46:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:56:55 UTC