- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu>
- Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 15:22:21 -0400
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
Peter - sorry, I should have been clearer - I forget that talking informally gets one in trouble in this group. I am advocating that we need AllDisjoint to be added. On Oct 30, 2007, at 2:05 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > >>> From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu> >>> Date: October 30, 2007 12:47:30 PM EDT >>> To: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com> >>> Subject: Re: overview document on Wiki (was Re: less technical >>> documents) >>> >>> Just a point - I couldn't figure out where in Wiki to make such a >>> point (and whether it is right to edit documents in the Wiki that >>> one is not the editor of) - in this document it says DisjointUnion >>> is syntactic sugar for DisjointClasses and EquivalentClasses of the >>> Union. Which makes sense, except that we have Issue 2, which is >>> that DisjointClasses (a/k/a AllDisjoint) doesn't seem to have an >>> RDF realization - so we should either note or link or solve... >>> -JH > > The issue, ISSUE-2, appears to be asking for a shorthand for many > disjointWith's, i.e., yet another vocabularly term, probably > owl:AllDisjoint. > > > However, DisjointClassies, *does* have an RDF realization, which can > easily be found using a simple search in > http://www.webont.org/owl/1.1/rdf_mapping.html > > DisjointClasses(c1 ... cn) > T(ci) owl:disjointWith T(cj) 1 <= i, j <=¤ n, i/= j > > peter > "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 Tuesday, 30 October 2007 19:22:59 UTC