- From: Rinke Hoekstra <hoekstra@uva.nl>
- Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 11:16:03 +0200
- To: Jie Bao <baojie@cs.rpi.edu>
- Cc: "W3C OWL Working Group" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Hi Ji, As far as I remember, the deprecation issue (ISSUE-90) was resolved by leaving the owl:DeprecatedClass and owl:DeprecatedProperty in the RDF serialisation (and thus in the OWL Full documents as well), but have them be mapped to a 'deprecated' annotation on class & property entities in the functional style syntax [1]. It appears that the RDF mapping document does not list the mapping from this deprecated marker to its RDF syntax. This is either an omission, or intended. [2] mentions "Note that Label, Comment, and Deprecated are syntactic abbreviations, so they are not listed in Table 2. " -Rinke [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008Apr/0014.html [2] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Mapping_to_RDF_Graphs#Translation_of_Annotations On 21 okt 2008, at 20:47, Jie Bao wrote: > > I found the two terms are used in Mapping to RDF Graph. However, as we > already have owl:deprecated in the Syntax, owl:DeprecatedClass and > owl:DeprecatedProperty should be deprecated now. > > Besides, I think the Mapping to RDF Graph document (maybe also the > syntax document?) should mention the list of deprecated vocabulary in > OWL 2. Currently, as far as I can remember, there are proposals to > deprecate owl:DataRange (replaced by rdfs:Datatype) and > owl:distinctMembers (replaced by owl:members). > > Jie ----------------------------------------------- Drs. Rinke Hoekstra Email: hoekstra@uva.nl Skype: rinkehoekstra Phone: +31-20-5253499 Fax: +31-20-5253495 Web: http://www.leibnizcenter.org/users/rinke Leibniz Center for Law, Faculty of Law University of Amsterdam, PO Box 1030 1000 BA Amsterdam, The Netherlands -----------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 22 October 2008 09:16:39 UTC