Re: Inverse properties in owl 2 (was Re: xsd or vocabulary)

On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:

> Simon, for those of us who cannot make the connection, can you explain how
> this answers Adrian's question? (I'm figuring I'll learn something.)


Karen -
    My message  was only addressing a specific part of the original
question:

# ex:describes is because there is no inverse property to wdrs:describedby.

# Does anybody know an appropriate predicate for this?


I changed the subject line to indicate both that I was only addressing a
small part of the specific question, and to briefly introduce a little bit
of OWL that is of more general use for the lld discussion.

The point that I was trying to make is that object properties always have an
inverse.  I didn't explicitly make the second point, which is that in pure
RDF, making an assertion using  an inverse property  has *exactly* the same
meaning as making an assertion using the forward property with the subject
and object reversed.

*(1) Kim loves Sandy.*
*
*
is true precisely when

*(2) Sandy is loved by Kim*.

is true.

This, of course, does not entail:
*
*
*(3) Sandy loves Kim*.

I am putting together some messages that will hopefully clarify some of the
points of confusion that have come up in that-other-thread; including
confusion about bibliographic data on the part of some of ontologists, and
confusion about ontologies on the part of some subject matter experts.
 Caution: made on equipment that also processes  Lubetzky and Quine.

Simon