- From: Ian Horrocks <Ian.Horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 17:14:03 +0100
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: hendler@cs.rpi.edu, public-owl-wg@w3.org
Please add a suitable issue to the issues list [1]. Thanks, Ian [1] http://code.google.com/p/owl1-1/issues/list On 23 Oct 2007, at 16:59, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > > The overview document, http://www.webont.org/owl/1.1/overview.html, > (remember your homework!), has a section on syntactic sugar: > > ***************************** > > 2.1. Syntactic Sugar > > OWL 1.1 provides two constructs that are simply syntactic sugar, to > make > some common idioms easier to write. > > The first syntactic sugar construct, DisjointUnion, defines one > description as the disjoint union of a set of descriptions. It is > simply > a combination of a DisjointClasses axiom and an EquivalentClasses > axiom > of the first description as the union of the rest. > > The second syntactic sugar construct is negative property membership > assertions NegativeObjectPropertyAssertion and > NegativeDataPropertyAssertion. > > ***************************** > > It probably would be a good idea to revise the abstracts of the > documents. Right now they are quite similar. I note that the > overview > version of 23 May 2007 needs a bit of work to be up-to-date. > > There will be an OWL 1.1 semantics document that formally > defines the semantics of all of OWL 1.1, but the general intent > is that the semantics of OWL 1.1 is the same as that of > [SROIQ]. with a simple datatype theory. > > The semantics document already exists. > > peter >
Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2007 16:14:20 UTC