- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 11:53:42 -0500
- To: Uli Sattler <sattler@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
So wait, am I hearing that this feature *could* be part of OWL 1.1DL? -Alan On Nov 7, 2007, at 11:42 AM, Uli Sattler wrote: > > On 7 Nov 2007, at 15:23, Alan Ruttenberg wrote: > >> Uli, >> >> Do the same decidability issues arise if only the last property on >> the chain is a datatype property? >> > > not really, but semantically, it doesn't make sense to have > datatype properties anywhere else but in the last place of a chain: > a datatype value can only ever occur as the "filler" of a property > (or "have in incoming property edge"), but never be "subject" of a > property. > > Cheers, Uli > >> -Alan >> >> On Nov 7, 2007, at 8:32 AM, Jim Hendler wrote: >> >>> >>> So we can allow this in OWL 1.1 Full, but not in OWL 1.1. DL >>> since it is only related to decidability which is the primary >>> differentiator between DL and Full. So I propose that we include >>> this construct in 1.1 but make it clear that using it will take >>> you to Full. >>> Since this is on agenda for discussion at a meeting I cannot >>> attend, I state for the record that RPI would oppose any closure >>> of this issue that would not allow a property chain to end in a >>> datatype property in the RDF realization >>> -JH >>> p.s. I realize now that my primary problem with the structural >>> document relates to this DL v. Full issue, and will take that up >>> in another thread. >>> >>> >>> On Nov 7, 2007, at 5:12 AM, Uli Sattler wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Dear all, >>>> >>>> a few days ago, I sent this email below as an answer to Owl Dev >>>> only, overlooking that I should have sent it to owl-wg as >>>> well...so here it is with a bit of delay, cheers, Uli >>>> >>>> >>>> On 5 Nov 2007, at 15:13, Uli Sattler wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Michael, >>>>> >>>>> there are reasons why these sub-property chains are only made >>>>> up of object properties: decidability in OWL (DL and 1.1) >>>>> relies on the fact that "datatype consistency" can be checked >>>>> for each object separately, without referring to other objects >>>>> and the values of their datatype properties. If we would need >>>>> to do this, we would more likely be in trouble, and would need to >>>>> >>>>> - be much more careful about what datatypes and datatype >>>>> predicates to allow without loosing decidability and >>>>> - use more complex reasoning mechanisms that have, to the best >>>>> of my knowledge, only been described on paper and never been >>>>> implemented or tested. >>>>> >>>>> So, I can see your use case, but I don't think we know enough >>>>> about this yet. >>>>> >>>>> If you want to know more, check out >>>>> >>>>> Carsten Lutz and Maja Milicic. A Tableau Algorithm for >>>>> Description Logics with Concrete Domains and General TBoxes. >>>>> Journal of Automated Reasoning. To appear. >>>>> http://lat.inf.tu-dresden.de/~clu/papers/archive/jar06.pdf >>>>> >>>>> Carsten Lutz. Description Logics with Concrete Domains - A >>>>> Survey. In Philippe Balbiani, Nobu-Yuki Suzuki, Frank Wolter, >>>>> and Michael Zakharyaschev, editors, Advances in Modal Logics >>>>> Volume 4. King's College Publications, 2003. >>>>> http://lat.inf.tu-dresden.de/~clu/papers/archive/aiml4.ps.gz >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, Uli >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 2 Oct 2007, at 13:26, Michael Schneider wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi! >>>>>> >>>>>> It just stroke me that there seem to be only Sub/Object/ >>>>>> PropertyChains in >>>>>> the current OWL-1.1 draft [1]. Does anyone know if there is a >>>>>> problem with >>>>>> also having sub property chains of the form >>>>>> >>>>>> SubDataPropertyOf( >>>>>> SubDataPropertyChain(R1 ... Rn-1 Dn) >>>>>> D ) >>>>>> >>>>>> where Dn and D are DataPropertyS (having compatible datatypes >>>>>> as their >>>>>> ranges), while R1 ... Rn-1 are ObjectPropertyS? >>>>>> >>>>>> With such a SubDataPropertyChain, one could for instance >>>>>> translate rules >>>>>> like: >>>>>> >>>>>> ?x hasFather ?y AND ?y hasFamilyName ?fn >>>>>> ==> ?x hasFamilyName ?fn >>>>>> >>>>>> with ?fn being an xsd:string, into an equivalent OWL axiom >>>>>> >>>>>> SubDataPropertyOf( >>>>>> SubDataPropertyChain(hasFather hasFamilyName) >>>>>> hasFamilyName ) >>>>>> >>>>>> In this case, the super property whould equal the final chain >>>>>> property (both >>>>>> 'hasFamilyName'). >>>>>> >>>>>> An example for a more general rule type (the analogon of the >>>>>> 'uncle' rule) >>>>>> would be: >>>>>> >>>>>> ?g containsUser ?u AND ?u hasUserID ?i >>>>>> ==> ?g containsUserWithID ?i >>>>>> >>>>>> where ?g would stand for some user group. Here, the DataPropertyS >>>>>> 'hasUserID' and 'containsUserWithID' differ from each other, >>>>>> because they >>>>>> are intended to have a different meaning. >>>>>> >>>>>> Any ideas, if this feature has a chance to enter the family of >>>>>> OWL-1.1 (or >>>>>> 1.2 :)) axioms? Or did I overlook some fundamental issue here? >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Michael >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] OWL-1.1 Semantics >>>>>> http://www.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 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>> "If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, >>> would it?." - Albert Einstein >>> >>> Prof James Hendler http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~hendler >>> Tetherless World Constellation Chair >>> Computer Science Dept >>> Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY 12180 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >
Received on Wednesday, 7 November 2007 16:54:00 UTC