Re: comments on RDF mapping

On Oct 30, 2007, at 6:01 PM, ewallace@cme.nist.gov wrote:

> For example, the last language constraint described above would  
> mean that we
> couldn't use property chains to describe properties that are  
> derived datavalues.

Yes, good point. The reasoning was that if, in OWL(DL) 1.1 a property  
had to be object or datatype, and that value was propagated then the  
destination property needs to be the same type. But chaining is  
through objects only, and hence rules out datatypes.

I supposes that an alternative would be to allow the datatype punned  
property for each object property in the chain carry the data values,  
but I don't know what the reasoning consequences of this choice would  
be. Maybe someone familiar with the mechanics could offer an idea of  
what would be involved with that.

-Alan