- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 19:52:07 -0400
- To: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
On Aug 21, 2008, at 1:39 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > > I don't see anything in the issue record > http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/137 > that shows your repair or how to implement it. You are right, I suggested the fix in previous emails and at the TC http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2008-08-13#line0510 I've added the pointers to the issue record. The proposal was to modify the reverse mapping rules in table 4 In each of the "If G contains this pattern" where there are two triples listed and one of them is either x rdf:type rdfs:Class or x rdf:type rdfs:Property, remove the other triple. This effects all the entries but the first and last. For example: If G contains: rdf:type owl:InverseFunctionalProperty. x rdf:type rdf:Property Then delete from G: x rdf:type rdf:Property would change to: If G contains: x rdf:type rdf:Property Then delete from G: x rdf:type rdf:Property -Alan On Aug 21, 2008, at 1:39 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > I don't see anything in the issue record > http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/137 > that shows your repair or how to implement it. > > peter > > > From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: proposal to close ISSUE-137 (rdfstypesbackward): Table > 4 in RDF mapping introduces incompatibility with OWL 1 > Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 13:20:31 -0400 > >> I have suggested a repair recently. I proposed we implement it or say >> why we can't. >> The use case is RDF files that can be be profitably used if >> coupled with >> additional structure in an OWL file. >> Importing such files without repairing the mapping issue prevents >> this >> because such files (those that use rdfs:class where owl:class would >> suffice) would be syntactically invalid. >> >> -Alan >> >> On Aug 21, 2008, at 12:17 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >> >>> >>> 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 23:52:51 UTC