- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 14:09:48 +0100
- To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Cc: OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
On 2 Jul 2008, at 13:58, Alan Ruttenberg wrote: > On Jul 2, 2008, at 8:33 AM, Bijan Parsia wrote: >> On 2 Jul 2008, at 12:21, Alan Ruttenberg wrote: >>> On Jul 2, 2008, at 7:12 AM, Bijan Parsia wrote: >>>> On 2 Jul 2008, at 12:00, Alan Ruttenberg wrote: >>>> >>> So better would be: >>> >>> UnnamedIndividual([handle] type(owl:Thing)) >>> >>> where handle is name for the individual that has scoped within >>> the ontology only. >> >> Aka bnode ids :) > > No. Specifically not, by this proposal. A different syntactic > category. One that would function, however, in the way you have > proposed bnodes should (other than the fact that they are not, > technically, bnodes) I meant "Aka" as in "A la". I.e., they serve the same purpose. >>> Why? The individuals created by the "UnnamedIndividual()" >>> constructor are not really anonymous - they are named, just not >>> by the user. So we have tree-shaped restrictions for the >>> existentials, as in OWL 1, and arbitrary graphs of named >>> individuals, as before. >> >> If Bnodes have existential semantics and they appear in arbitrary >> graphs patterns, then we're back to where we started :) > > Yes, but I've just said that they can't. Only the the pseudo > anonymous individuals can appear in arbitrary graphs by this proposal. [snip] oh!, I misread: """That is, we could offer two forms of anonymous individual constructors. Neither would specify a name. One form of constructor would allocate a unique (to exceedingly high probability) name. The other would use a bnode, interpreted using the usual existential semantics. Tree-shape restrictions would hold for the existentials, but not for the other kinds of anonymous individuals.""" I.e., that in the second, that "existentials" meant "someValuesFrom" not "BNodes with existential semantics". I think the plural "kinds" was what threw me. Yeah, fine. Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2008 13:07:36 UTC