- From: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@deri.org>
- Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 12:21:29 +0100
- To: 'W3C OWL Working Group' <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Dear all, Until today, I did not look at the semantics of AsymmetricProperty because the word was familiar enough to me to intuitively understand it. I was however wrongly assuming that the word was used to denote non-symmetric. From a linguistic perspective, asymmetry is a lack or absence of symmetry. Some mathematical texts use "asymmetric" to simply mean "not symmetric". I am aware that "asymmetric relation" is often used in mathematics to denote "strongly asymmetric relation", i.e., no pairs of elements are related in a bidirectional (symmetric) way. While it is perfectly ok that OWL2 defines AsymmetricProperties the way it does, I am surprised not to find *any* remark, neither in the formal specs, nor in the UFDs, nor in the mailing list archives, about the fact that AsymmetricProperty is not the complement of SymmetricProperty. I am sure that other people are understanding asymmetry in the same way as I did, so I'd suggest adding a small sentence in the Primer (Sect.6.1 [1]) and NF&R (Sect.2.2.3 [2]) stating that "asymmetric" is not the negation of "symmetric". Since the UFDs are still in LC, this should be addressed somehow. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-owl2-primer-20090421/#Property_Characteristics [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-owl2-new-features-20090421/#F6:_Reflexive.2C_Irreflexive.2C_and_Asymmetric_Object_Properties Regards, -- Antoine Zimmermann Post-doctoral researcher at: Digital Enterprise Research Institute National University of Ireland, Galway IDA Business Park Lower Dangan Galway, Ireland antoine.zimmermann@deri.org http://vmgal34.deri.ie/~antzim/
Received on Friday, 31 July 2009 11:22:11 UTC