- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 15:14:08 +0100
- To: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>
- Cc: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, W3C RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <68D16E16-8F95-44A9-A4A0-461649A697F9@w3.org>
On Mar 1, 2012, at 14:31 , Antoine Zimmermann wrote: > Le 01/03/2012 13:41, Ivan Herman a écrit : >> >> On Mar 1, 2012, at 13:31 , Antoine Zimmermann wrote: [snip] >>>> >>>> If (:a owl:sameAs :b) and (:a owl:differentFrom :b) appeared in >>>> the same graph, then an OWL reasoner, using the definition of >>>> the predicates, would deduce that there is a inconsistence. I >>>> mean: the triples themselves are just fine, it is up to a >>>> reasoner to find the problem. >>>> >>>> If they are in different graphs, then the inconsistence would >>>> not occur, because we only care about the models in separate >>>> graphs, independently from one another. >>> >>> Hmm, this seems to contradict what you said above. If URIs are >>> interpreted identically in all graphs with overlapping >>> vocabularies, how can :a be interpreted as the same thing as :b and >>> at the same time as something different then :b? Either you have an >>> inconsistency, or you interpret the URIs differently in the two >>> graphs. >>> >> >> "Same thing" does not exist in RDF semantics, afaik. The only thing >> that exist are triples and other triples that can be deduced thereof. >> In my understanding, it is perfectly fine to put, into the same >> graph, the triples >> >> (:a owl:sameAs :b) (:a owl:differentFrom :b) >> >> and an interpretation 'I' can map :a and :b onto *different* elements >> in the target set (or, even, they have to do that?). It is only when >> an OWL reasoner looks at these triples that it will shout because the >> semantic condition for an OWL-interpretation are violated if that >> happens due to the special semantics of sameAs and differentFrom. >> >> If we have >> >> G1 {(:a owl:sameAs :b)} G2 {(:a owl:differentFrom :b)} >> >> The OWL reasoner will look only at I|G1 and I|G2, respectively, and >> in those constrained environment no inconsistency occurs. > > You said that the interpretation could be an OWL interpretation, right? > According to the OWL semantics, :a owl:sameAs :b is satisfied iff the interpretation of :a is equal to the interpretation of :b (said differently, :a denotes the exact same thing as :b). :a owl:differentFrom :b is satisfied if the interpretation of :a is different from the interpretation :b (:a denotes a different thing than :b). So there cannot be an OWL interpretation that satisfies both. Ah. I just checked in the OWL 2 RDF based semantics and indeed you are right. There is a very special case for these two (and their derivatives like owl:AllDifferent): From Table 5.9 in [1] ( a1 , a2 ) ∈ IEXT(I(owl:sameAs)) iff a1 = a2 ( a1 , a2 ) ∈ IEXT(I(owl:differentFrom)) iff a1 ≠ a2 I am not sure how to answer that issue, I must admit... Ivan [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-rdf-based-semantics/ [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-profiles/#Reasoning_in_OWL_2_RL_and_RDF_Graphs_using_Rules > > Or, maybe, there is something not stated in your proposal that I don't see. > >> >> >>>> [...] >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Now, if you want to do temporal reasoning, provenance, trust, >>>>> it's more complicated. But the fierceful rejection by Pat on >>>>> the mere idea of a multi-interpretation semantics has deviated >>>>> the discussion away from these issues. >>>> >>>> And I do not think this working group should deal with temporal >>>> reasoning, provenance, or trust. Just giving the basis in terms >>>> of that semantics is what should be done. >>> >>> I do not mean the WG should provide a standard for temporal >>> reasoning etc. I just mean that we have to analyse these use cases >>> in light of the various options we have for defining a semantics of >>> datasets/quads/multiple-graph structure. >> >> Ok. >> >> Ivan >> >> ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: >> http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 FOAF: >> http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Antoine Zimmermann > ISCOD / LSTI - Institut Henri Fayol > École Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Saint-Étienne > 158 cours Fauriel > 42023 Saint-Étienne Cedex 2 > France > Tél:+33(0)4 77 42 83 36 > Fax:+33(0)4 77 42 66 66 > http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/ > ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Thursday, 1 March 2012 14:14:13 UTC