proposal to close ISSUE-137 (rdfstypesbackward): Table 4 in RDF mapping introduces incompatibility with OWL 1

• From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
• Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 12:17:12 -0400 (EDT)
• To: public-owl-wg@w3.org
• Message-Id: <20080821.121712.97707253.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>

From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: ISSUE-137 (rdfstypesbackward): Table 4 in RDF mapping introduces incompatibility with OWL 1
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2008 22:13:24 -0400

> I clarified in the issue description that A imports B.
> -Alan
> 
> On Aug 2, 2008, at 10:02 PM, OWL Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:
> 
> > ISSUE-137 (rdfstypesbackward): Table 4 in RDF mapping introduces
> >incompatibility with OWL 1 
> >
> > http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/137
> >
> > Raised by: Alan Ruttenberg
> > On product:
> >
> > In OWL 1 one could have Ontology A, B with
> >
> > A:  :foo rdf:type rdfs:Class
> > B:  :foo rdf:type owl:Class
> >
> > In OWL 2, A  would be rejected as syntactically invalid because no
> > part of the reverse mapping handles the single triple with rdfs:Class 
> >
> > An analogous situation arises with rdf:Property

This issue has been sitting for a while with no action.

I propose that this issue be closed by noting the incompatibility.

Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Bell Labs Research

Received on Thursday, 21 August 2008 16:18:06 UTC