- From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
- Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 21:40:12 +0100
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <0EF30CAA69519C4CB91D01481AEA06A06C2E75@judith.fzi.de>
Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >The changes that you see are to deal with annotations. As annotations >are generally not fully handled in OWL 1.0 DL tools, I thought that it >would be better to remove annotations in conclusions, as stated in > >> OWL DL: Ontology Language with Semantic Web basis >> [...] >> * Annotations are not allowed on the right-hand side of entailments. >> - This fixes the problem noted in ISSUE-72 at the expense >of limiting >> what sort of questions can be asked in OWL DL. > >It would probably have been better to make the statement as follows, >adding the stuff within **. I also fixed up the wording a bit. > >Desirable backward-compatibility property: >1/ If O, O' are valid LHS and RHS for *both* OWL 1.1 DL > *and OWL 1.0 DL* entailment > and O |= O' in OWL 1.0 DL iff T(O) |= T(O') in OWL 1.0 Full > then O |= O' in OWL 1.1 DL iff T(O) |= T(O') in OWL 1.1 Full > >peter Hm, I think I was on something else. Let's ignore for the moment the question for rigorous syntactical validity (explicitly typing all entities in 1.1-DL, and the like). Then, the "if-and-then" statement above disallows scenarios, where * O does *not* entail O' under both 1.0-DL and 1.0-Full semantics, and * O does *not* entail O' under 1.1-DL semantics, but * O *does* entail O' under 1.1-Full semantics But such scenarios will be common, I believe. Take the following example: O := { :p owl11:disjointDataProperties :q } O' := { :p owl11:disjointObjectProperties :q } There is obviously no entailment in OWL-1.0, neither for DL nor Full, since OWL-1.0 does not know about disjoint properties. There is also no entailment in 1.1-DL. But O *will* probably entail O' in 1.1-Full. :p and :q can be deduced from O to (a) be disjoint, and to (b) be data properties. And so, in Full, they are also /object/ properties, still being disjoint as such, of course. But with the demand for validity... I have to think further on this. Cheers, Michael -- Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik Karlsruhe Abtl. Information Process Engineering (IPE) Tel : +49-721-9654-726 Fax : +49-721-9654-727 Email: Michael.Schneider@fzi.de Web : http://www.fzi.de/ipe/eng/mitarbeiter.php?id=555 FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959 Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Az: 14-0563.1 Regierungspräsidium Karlsruhe Vorstand: Rüdiger Dillmann, Michael Flor, Jivka Ovtcharova, Rudi Studer Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus
Received on Friday, 1 February 2008 20:40:25 UTC