- From: OWL <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 21:16:42 +0000 (GMT)
- To: public-owl-wg@w3.org
ISSUE-18 (property typing): REPORTED: Fine-grained property typing http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/ Raised by: Peter Patel-Schneider On product: Reported by jlc415, Jun 11, 2007 In OWL-DL whether a role name represented an object or a datatype property was inferred globally on the basis of the entire ontology. (If it was not possible to infer which type a property was, then the difference did not make any difference to interpretation of the ontology.) It was possible to use a property in (for example) cardinality restrictions without making it explicit which type of property was used. The current syntax specification requires that every use of a property explicitly encode whether the property should be treated as a datatype or as an object property. The extra verbosity required might not be considered an issue for the (already cumbersome) abstract syntax, but it prevents any terse alternate syntax from being converted to a valid OWL 1.1 fragment. Manchester OWL Syntax, for example, lets one to write expressions along the lines of hasAddress atleast 1 but there are two possible translations of this expression to OWL 1.1: ObjectMinCardinality(1 hasAddress) and DataMinCardinality(1 hasAddress) This is a significant problem for interfaces which allow users to write OWL fragments in isolation. This issue is related to that of object/datatype property punning. If such punning were disallowed then there would be no need for such explicit typing.
Received on Wednesday, 24 October 2007 21:16:56 UTC