- From: Paradies, Simon <simon.paradies.ext@siemens.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 18:40:42 +0200
- To: <public-owl-comments@w3.org>
Dear Working Group members, The use of OWL to describe common object relational models and its instantiations is an intuitive use case. However, due to the OWA semantics the use of cardinality constraints in OWL for model checking and classification purposes is not trivially possible. Not considering further hassles like non-UNA, a loophole is to add closure axioms to individuals in the form of 'property allValuesOf({object1, object2, ...})' for each property. Thus, it is necessary to assert the non-existence of further values for each property. This is a tedious task and blows up the footprint of the KB significantly. It would be desirable to be able to asserted this using some form of syntactic sugar. Albeit altering syntax is not being considered in the current state of the specification process (cf. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/2009Apr/0082.htm l), I would like to post this issue for discussion and future consideration. With best regards, Simon Paradies External service provider at Siemens AG Corporate Technology CT IC 1 Otto-Hahn-Ring 6 81739 Munich, Germany Tel.: +49 (89) 636-41451 Fax: +49 (89) 636-49438 mailto:simon.paradies.ext@siemens.com <mailto:simon.paradies.ext@siemens.com> Important notice: This e-mail and any attachment thereof contain corporate proprietary information. If you have received it by mistake, please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and delete this e-mail and its attachments from your system. Thank you.
Received on Monday, 11 May 2009 20:07:27 UTC