Re: Small discrepancy between the OWL RL set and the RDF semantics document

I just realized: it may as simple as a change of term; is
owl:disjointWith the new term for the old owl:disjointClasses? In which
case it is a simple change in the rule document.

Ivan

Ivan Herman wrote:
> Michael, Boris, Zhe
> 
> (I am not sure who of you is responsible for this part),
> 
> Table 4 of the profile document[1] contains rules for class axioms; it
> includes:
> 
> [[[
> T(?c1, owl:disjointClasses, ?c2)
> T(?x, rdf:type, ?c1)
> T(?x, rdf:type, ?c2)
> 
> =>
> 
> False.
> ]]]
> 
> However the mapping to RDF[2] maps DisjointClasses(....) to
> 
> _:x rdf:type owl:AllDisjointClasses
> _:x owl:members T(SEQ CE1 ... CEn)
> 
> and there is no vocabulary element owl:disjointClasses in [2], or in
> [3]. I presume the current rule is a leftover from a previous version of
> [1].
> 
> I actually do not see any clause for AllDisjointClasses in [1] either,
> but that may be intentional.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Ivan
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Profiles
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Mapping_to_RDF_Graphs
> [3] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/RDF-Based_Semantics
> 

-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf