- From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
- Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 14:53:48 +0200
- To: <public-owl-dev@w3.org>
- Cc: <EZolin@cs.man.ac.uk>
Hi, list! I wonder if it will be possible in OWL-1.1 to express (the one direction of) the "uncle" relation (?x hasParent ?y), (?y hasBrother ?z) -> (?x hasUncle ?z) or not? Until now, I always had the restrictions in mind as given by Evgeny Zolin's DL Complexity Simulator [1]: There, "complex role inclusions" (the "R" in "SROIQ" aka OWL-1.1), are shown in two variants: R - Complex role inclusions: RoS \subseteq R, RoS \subseteq S So from this it seems that the upper role does always have to be one of the roles in the chain. And with this restriction, the "uncle" relation would be out of play. But the OWL-1.1 draft [2] does not seem to make this restriction: SubObjectPropertyOf( SubObjectPropertyChain(R1 ... Rn) S ) AFAICS, there seems to be no requirement that one of the chain properties R_i have to equal the upper property S. So, will I get my uncle, or not? Cheers, Michael [1] http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~ezolin/dl/ [2] http://webont.org/owl/1.1/semantics.html#2 -- Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik Karlsruhe Abtl. Information Process Engineering (IPE) Tel : +49-721-9654-726 Fax : +49-721-9654-727 Email: Michael.Schneider@fzi.de Web : http://www.fzi.de/ipe/eng/mitarbeiter.php?id=555 FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959 Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Az: 14-0563.1 Regierungspräsidium Karlsruhe Vorstand: Rüdiger Dillmann, Michael Flor, Jivka Ovtcharova, Rudi Studer Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus
Received on Saturday, 8 September 2007 12:54:04 UTC