Re: disjointness of numerics

• From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
• Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:44:37 -0500 (EST)
• To: sandro@w3.org
• Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
• Message-Id: <20090121.114437.13736818.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Subject: disjointness of numerics
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:21:09 -0500

> Informal test case:
> 
>     premise:     eg:x eg:y "1"^^xsd:decimal.
> 
>     conclusion:  eg:x eg:y "1"^^xsd:double.
> 
> Does this entailment hold in OWL 1?  

These two datatypes are not part of the OWL 1 semantics.  None of the
OWL 1 documents provide complete information on how to handle them.

> Does this entailment hold in OWL 2?   [I think so.]

Yes.

> Alternatively (the same thing, I think):
> 
>    premise:      eg:x owl:sameAs "1"^^xsd:decimal.
> 
>    conclusion:   eg:x owl:sameAs "1"^^xsd:double.

This is Full.

> And what do existing OWL 1 reasoners do with these?

Unknown.

>      -- Sandro

peter

Received on Wednesday, 21 January 2009 16:42:27 UTC