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

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 22:00:43 -0400

> On Aug 21, 2008, at 8:53 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:

[...]

> > Further, I expect that almost all RDF graphs that contain
> >
> > 	ex:foo rdf:type rdf:Property
> >
> > will also use ex:foo *as* a property, perhaps like
> >
> > 	ex:subject ex:foo ex:object
> >
> > The proposed change would not result in graphs like this being
> > acceptable OWL 2 DL.
 
> If there is another declaration somewhere else in the imports closure
> that declares foo as an ObjectProperty, DatatypeProperty, or
> AnnotationProperty, then this graph will be acceptable. That is the
> expected use case. 

So the graph has to
1/ use the OWL vocabulary (owl:imports, at least)
2/ use a property in a way acceptable to OWL (e.g., only object values)
3/ have "incorrect" typing (e.g.., rdf:Property instead of owl:ObjectProperty)
4/ import another graph that fixes up the typing
I don't think that this is a strong use case.

[...]

> Alan

peter

Received on Friday, 22 August 2008 11:05:59 UTC