- From: Barry Bishop <barry.bishop@ontotext.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 18:52:14 +0200
- To: public-owl-dev@w3.org
Hello OWL2 working group, I would like to ask a couple of fairly straightforward questions regarding the conformance tests, and the semantics, of the RL profile. It is very likely that I have missed something fundamental, so I would be very pleased if someone could nudge me in the right direction. I have implemented the RDF semantics using the rule set given in: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-profiles/#Reasoning_in_OWL_2_RL_and_RDF_Graphs_using_Rules However, I am finding this hard to reconcile with the conformance tests found here: http://owl.semanticweb.org/exports/approved/profile-RL.rdf because some of the expected conclusions of the positive entailment tests can not by produced by any of the RL entailment rules (I have been careful to select only those tests labelled with 'test:semantics test:RDF-BASED'). A couple of specific examples: Chain2trans =========== Premise ontology: <http://example.org/#p> rdf:type owl:ObjectProperty . _:bnode0 rdf:first <http://example.org/#p> ; rdf:rest _:bnode1 . _:bnode1 rdf:first <http://example.org/#p> ; rdf:rest rdf:nil . <http://example.org/#p> owl:propertyChainAxiom _:bnode0 . Conclusion ontology: <http://example.org/#p> rdf:type owl:TransitiveProperty . Search as I might, I can not find any entailment rules with owl:TransitiveProperty in the head. So how can this be? DisjointClasses-001 =================== Premise ontology: <http://example.org/Boy> rdf:type owl:Class . <http://example.org/Girl> rdf:type owl:Class . <http://example.org/Boy> owl:disjointWith <http://example.org/Girl> . <http://example.org/Stewie> rdf:type <http://example.org/Boy> . Conclusion ontology: <http://example.org/Girl> rdf:type owl:Class . _:bnode1 rdf:type owl:Class ; owl:complementOf <http://example.org/Girl> . <http://example.org/Stewie> rdf:type _:bnode1 . However, there are no OWL2-RL rules that have blank nodes in the head. Perhaps I have misunderstood this (in regard to RDFS semantics): "An OWL 2 RL/RDF implementation MAY include these triples and entailment rules as necessary without invalidating the conformance requirements for OWL 2 RL [OWL 2 Conformance]." - my implementation does not have, for example, RDF(S) se1 & se2 rules. Or is there some other required behaviour somewhere that I have overlooked? Many thanks in advance, barry
Received on Friday, 28 May 2010 21:01:12 UTC