- From: Michael Smith <msmith@clarkparsia.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:45:59 -0500
- To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Cc: OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 20:26 +0000, Bijan Parsia wrote: > While doing this I hit two interesting points: > > One from Boris: > ""Every OWL API wants to provide "what are the classes in this > ontology", but what does that mean for OWL?""" > > However, my understanding of the current structural specification is > that this is not answered. Ontologies contain axioms, not classes. > Are the classes "in" an ontology the classes in the signature of the > ontology? All terms? Declared classes? Classes mentioned in imported > ontologies but not in local axioms? Discussion of this at the F2F prompted [ISSUE-89]. It also relates to the use of declaration axioms and, as you observer, gets pulled into the on-going discussion of imports. We can also pull this into the round-tripping discussion because a typing triple alone is not an axiom and would not survive round-tripping. I believe that current user expectations are that a typing triple puts an entity "in" an ontology, but agree with Boris that this expectation is not formalized in the OWL 1.0 specs. -- Mike Smith Clark & Parsia [ISSUE-89] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/89
Received on Wednesday, 16 January 2008 20:46:18 UTC