- From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:09:55 +0100
- To: "Web Ontology Language ((OWL)) Working Group WG" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Message-ID: <0EF30CAA69519C4CB91D01481AEA06A06C23E3@judith.fzi.de>
Hi! My comments to agenda item: o PROPOSED: close (as REJECTED) Issue 73 (Should owl:Thing be necessarily infinite?) as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Jan/0059.html There have already been several (strong, IMHO) arguments pro rejecting this issue. And I will add mine, too (sorry, Jeremy! :-]): * The fact that owl:Thing is infinite in OWL-Full cannot really be used as an argument for saying that owl:Thing has to be also infinite in DL. owl:Thing in OWL-DL has a very different semantics from owl:Thing in OWL-Full. In OWL-Full, owl:Thing is the whole universe, containing /everything/ (including classes, properties, data values, and data types). In OWL-DL, however, owl:Thing is only the class of individuals, but does not contain classes, properties, data values or data types. So owl:Thing/DL and owl:Thing/Full cannot really be compared. * In OWL-Full, the infiniteness is something which can be (mathematically) concluded from the semantic properties of the language. There is no explicitly given requirement that Full has to be infinite. So I wouldn't like to set such an explicit requirement to DL, either. * And last, I do not fully agree that making DL's owl:Thing infinite really helps in enhancing the compatibility between DL and Full. There are certainly better characterizations of "compatibility" than via cardinality. Very bad example, but I don't find a better at the moment: The enumeration {1,2,3} is in some way compatible with the natural numbers |N, which is itself in some way compatible with the real numbers |R. The compatibility here is given by inclusion, but not by cardinality. In OWL-1.0, the compatibility was (partially) given (hopefully) by inclusion of entailments. The compatibility topic is a topic, which has to be further discussed, of course. But I strongly believe that cardinality of owl:Thing will play no real role in this discussion. 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 Wednesday, 16 January 2008 17:10:08 UTC