- From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
- Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 10:23:14 +0100
- To: "Giorgos Stoilos" <gstoil@image.ece.ntua.gr>, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <0EF30CAA69519C4CB91D01481AEA06A075139D@judith.fzi.de>
Hi Giorgos and Peter! Giorgos Stoilos answered to Peter F. Patel-Schneider: >> > >Nor does >> > > >> > >p rdf:type _:s . >> > >_:s owl:someValuesFrom C . >> > >_:s owl:onProperty r . >> > > >> > >pD* entail >> > > >> > >p r _:x . >> > >> > Not in pD*, but in "pD*sv", an extention to pD*, which is >also specified >> in >> > the paper (Definition 6.1). >> > >> > However, AFAICS, for pD*sv the paper only provides a >completeness result >> > w.r.t. triple rules. I did not find a complexity bound, neither for >> > entailment nor for consistency, in contrast to the bounds >which exist >> for >> > pD*. >> >> > So pD*sv might be a little too much as a foundation for OWL-Prime. >> >> Probably, as I believe that rule application in pD*sv is >non-terminating. >> >> Consider, for example, >> >> (1) re owl:someValuesFrom re . >> (2) re owl:onProperty p . >> (3-0) o1 rdf:type re . >> >> Then from (1,2,3-0) rule rdf-svx produces a new b-node _:b1 with >> >> (3-1) _:b1 rdf:type re . >> (4-1) o1 p _:b1 . >> >> Then from (1,2,3-1) rule rdf-svx produces a new b-node b2 with >> >> (3-2) _:b2 rdf:type re . >> (4-2) _:b1 p _:b2 . >> > >I guess you could always use some blocking condition to stop >the algorithm >and then imply that > >_:b1 p _:b1 > >...right? Hm, I certainly do not understand what you mean by a "blocking condition" here. At least, alone from the axioms (1)-(3-0), I cannot see anything which allows me to assume that there exists some instance of class re which has p-relationship to itself, i.e. that a "loop" triple '_:b1 p _:b1' can be entailed. It is only stated that: "If entity x is in class re, then it has a p-relationship to some entity y which also lives in class re." y may or may not coincide with x; in general one cannot expect this to be the case. In fact, if my universe is the set of integers, and my property p denotes the 'smallerThan' relation, then I wouldn't want this someValue restriction to allow such a loop triple at all. I can even define class re to be a someValue restriction on property p := owl:differentFrom, in which case such loops would be formally disallowed to exist. So, at the moment, I do not see any method to stop the inference chain. But perhaps I misunderstood you completely? >> And so on. This inference chain also exists for partial pD*sv >> closures. >> >> [...] >> >> > Cheers, >> > Michael >> >> peter @Peter: This was an interesting and pretty convincing example, thanks! 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, 29 February 2008 09:23:30 UTC