- From: Boris Motik <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 18:42:07 -0000
- To: "'OWL Working Group WG'" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Hello, There is no inconsistency here: if you serialize an OWL Functional Syntax ontology into RDF and read it back, you'll get the same ontology, modulo pair-wise axioms (such as DifferentIndividuals). I don't really believe that we need a proof for that; however, I agree that saying this explicitly in the document is a good idea. Regards, Boris > -----Original Message----- > From: public-owl-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-owl-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of OWL Working > Group Issue Tracker > Sent: 20 November 2007 14:53 > To: public-owl-wg@w3.org > Subject: ISSUE-66 (mapping inconsistencies): REPORTED: inconsistencies between mapping rules > > > > ISSUE-66 (mapping inconsistencies): REPORTED: inconsistencies between mapping rules > > http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/ > > Raised by: Jeremy Carroll > On product: > > > The OWL 1.0 mapping rules only mapped from the abstract syntax to the triples. > > The member submission defines two sets of mapping rules (going both ways). > > Presumably there is some relationship required between the two sets of mapping rules. > > This relationship is neither stated nor proved. > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2007 18:43:00 UTC