- From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
- Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 23:13:34 +0200
- To: "Bijan Parsia" <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Cc: "Boris Motik" <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, "OWL 1.1" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <0EF30CAA69519C4CB91D01481AEA06A0014C5FE6@judith.fzi.de>
>-----Original Message----- >From: Bijan Parsia [mailto:bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk] >Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 12:47 AM >To: Michael Schneider >Cc: Boris Motik; OWL 1.1 >Subject: Re: question on "forest-like anonymous individuals" restriction >of OWL 2 DL > >On 27 Jun 2009, at 17:11, Michael Schneider wrote: >[snip] >> But from what you say above, a second issue seems to arise: It looks >> to me >> that OWL 2 DL now does not even allow to state /single/ property >> assertions >> with blank nodes in both subject and predicate position. Because, as >> you >> said, with >> >> ObjectPropertyAssertion( ex:p _:s _:o ) >> >> one will always also have >> >> ObjectPropertyAssertion( InverseObjectProperty(ex:p) _:o _:s ) >> >> and so there are in fact always /two/ triples > >Triples aren't properties. There's only one property here. One >relation. Think of the model. > >> (though only one of them >> explicitly stated) with their contained blank nodes building a >> circular >> structure. > >To have a cycle you need at least two segments. Here you have a line >which you can go back and forth on. > > >Consider > _:x p _:y. _:y p _:z. > >You *still* don't have a cycle. You can't get to x, through z without >going through _:y *twice*. If it were a cycle, you could get back to >_:x directly. > >Cheers, >Bijan. I don't think that the "forest-like" restrictions allow to have both of the above property assertions together in the same ontology. My error was to believe that it would already be disallowed to have the second /entailed/ by the first. That's /not/ the case. But if I explicitly state them both in an ontology ObjectPropertyAssertion( ex:p _:s _:o ) ObjectPropertyAssertion( InverseObjectProperty(ex:p) _:o _:s ) then there are two distinct property assertions containing both _:s and _:o. I understand this to be disallowed in OWL 2 DL, regardless of what the semantic relationship is between the property expressions used in the two property assertions. Cheers, Michael -- Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider Research Scientist, Dept. Information Process Engineering (IPE) Tel : +49-721-9654-726 Fax : +49-721-9654-727 Email: michael.schneider@fzi.de WWW : http://www.fzi.de/michael.schneider ======================================================================= FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959 Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts, Az 14-0563.1, RP Karlsruhe Vorstand: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Rüdiger Dillmann, Dipl. Wi.-Ing. Michael Flor, Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Wolffried Stucky, Prof. Dr. Rudi Studer Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus =======================================================================
Received on Sunday, 28 June 2009 21:14:15 UTC