- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 11:59:26 -0400
- To: "Boris Motik" <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 3:59 AM, Boris Motik <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk> wrote: >> Still a bit more. What if a:Aquilla is an individual in 0. What if it >> is also punned as a Class in O? >> Would URI be an "object" in the sort of object model that you envision >> the metamodel specifying? >> Should a tool display the raw URI as the value of the annotation? Or >> all views of the URI? >> > > I'm not sure I understand this: the URI a:Aquilla is not an individual in O because it is not used as such in any of the axioms. In this new annotation system, the usage of a URI in an annotation would not make this URI an individual. Hi Boris, I asked: "What if a:Aquilla is an individual in 0" That is, if there *was* somewhere else the individual view is used in the ontology. > URI is already a class in the metamodel. Entities such ash Individual, Class, etc. do not subclass URI; rather, they reuse URI by composition. This seems to be more appropriate: you have one and only one URI, but different views use it. > I guess a tool should display the URI as an annotation value. But this is probably getting into too much detail: we wouldn't specify this in our spec, would we? I guess the best we can do is give an example of the sort I gave above. I agree that it shouldn't be in the spec, but I think we should have at least some story. It might be something worth mentioning in the primer or other user facing document. The case I am considering is when the URI has multiple views, and a tool such as protege has to enable comfortable interaction with the annotation value URI. Regards, Alan
Received on Thursday, 16 October 2008 16:06:54 UTC