- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu>
- Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 14:23:11 -0500
- To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Cc: "Web Ontology Language ((OWL)) Working Group WG" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
I thought the primary idea of DL-Lite was that it would provide primary database functionality -- how can it do that without keys? On Mar 6, 2008, at 6:18 AM, Bijan Parsia wrote: > > On 6 Mar 2008, at 11:04, Ivan Herman wrote: > >> Boris, Bernardo, >> >> I went through >> >> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Fragments_Proposal >> >> again today. One thing that I may have missed: I tried to see if I >> can use (inverse)functional properties for DL-Lite or not. I did >> not find any reference to those neither in 3.1 nor in 3.2. Again, I >> may have missed something... > > Let's see if I can discern from the text the situation. (As a test > of the spec.) > > In section 3: > http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Fragments_Proposal#DL-Lite > > """Several variants of DL-Lite have been described in the > literature. The variant presented here is called DL-LiteR since it > allows for property inclusion axioms; it therefore contains the > intersection between RDFS and OWL 1.1 DL. Other variants trade > property inclusion axioms for functionality and inverse- > functionality of object properties.""" > > I think this is clear that functionality and inverse functionality > of *object* properties are forbidden. > > Actually ,the rest of the sections are quiet about data properties > altogether. Which would mean that data properties are forbidden in > this variant. Which means that it's not really the intersection of > RDFS and OWL 1.1 DL? > > I do think that if we make this DL Lite not have data properties, > the text should call that out (e.g., in the list of missing > features). OTOH, I think we should allow data properties ;) I would > think it would be ok to trade datasubproperties for keys (from a > user pov)...I don't know if that would be ok from the logic/ > impelmentation pov off the top of my had (while retaining object > subproperties). > > Cheers, > Bijan. > > > "If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would it?." - Albert Einstein Prof James Hendler http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~hendler Tetherless World Constellation Chair Computer Science Dept Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY 12180
Received on Thursday, 6 March 2008 19:23:24 UTC