- From: Denny Vrandečić <dvr@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 12:19:42 +0100
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- CC: Owl Dev <public-owl-dev@w3.org>
I think this kind of punning comes very natural. Snoopy a Dog. Dog a Species. Charlie_Brown Dog Snoopy. All of them feel right, and are also allowed in both RDF and OWL with punning. Father rdfs:range Father. Anakin a Father. Luke Father Anakin. This is a natural pattern to describe most of the so called dependant properties in OntoClean, as well, but that's a sidenote. Or, to put it shortly, I really like punning :) It will also make our work on wikis so much easier! (and I could write an essay on how) Cheers, denny Jeremy Carroll wrote: > > off-list wrote: >> could you please point me to examples of use of punning in real >> applications. >> > > There are three examples that fall under the two kinds that Michael > identified: > >>>> >>>> When thinking about punning in OWL-1.1-DL, I always differentiated >>>> between >>>> two "kinds" of punning: >>>> >>>> * punning between individuals and classes, > > > A) classes as instances > ======================= > A class in one view of an ontology may be an individual in another. > e.g. > the class of Ford Motor Vehicle Models, may include the individual Ford > Cortina; > the class of Ford Cortina may include a particular car that I once owned > (actually an untrue statement!). > > It can be argued that this is a modelling error. However, if so, it is a > popular one. > >>>> >>>> * punning between data properties and object properties. >>>> > > B) RDF legacy > ============= > dc:creator is used as both, and its definition seems to expect it to be > used as both. There are perhaps some other properties from the RDF world > that are important and behave similarly. (e.g. rdf:_1, rdf:_2) > > Technically, but of no great interest really, RDF legacy also includes > some 'punning' between individuals and classes, because RDF includes > metamodelling such as: > owl:inverseOf rdf:type rdf:Property. > > > C) lists > ======== > Evren provided the example of rdf:first (or eg:first in a shadow > vocabulary), in a list. In a list of literals, rdf:first acts as a data > property, in a list of things, rdf:first acts as an object property. > > Bijan motivates some of the design decisions in OWL 1.1 as trying to > accomodate more RDF, so that arguments B and C have merit. Also, because > of the popularity of the modelling technique of classes as instances, A > has merit. > [[Bijan, have I correctly understood your position?]] > > Jeremy > > > > >
Received on Friday, 11 January 2008 11:19:46 UTC