W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > December 2011

Re: ISSUE-116 (vocab-owl): Consider owl terms for vocab expansion [2nd LC Comment - RDFa Core 1.1]

From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 21:43:58 -0500
To: RDF Web Applications Working Group WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <EE06D45C-9990-4E76-B369-212BF46E31B8@greggkellogg.net>
I'm just going through my code relative to vocabulary expansion. We agreed to add owl:equivalentProperty and owl:equivalentClass, but in transforming from RDFS to OWL, it looks like we lost some rules, is this intentional?


rdfs5: uuu rdf:subPropertyOf vvv . vvv rdfs:subPropertyOf xxx . => uuu rdfs:subPropertyOf xxx
rdfs7: aaa rdfs:subPropertyOf bbb . uuu aaa yyy . => uuu bbb yyy
rdfs9: uuu rdfs:subPropertyOf xxx . vvv rdf:type uuu . => vvv rdf:type xxx
rdfs11: uuu rdf:subClassOf vvv . vvv rdfs:subClassOf xxx . => uuu rdfs:subClassOf xxx


prp-spo1: p1 rdfs:subProperty p2 . x p1 y . => x p2 y					(same as rdfs:7)
prp-eqp1: p1 owl:equivalentProperty p2 . x p1 y . => x p2 y			(new, like rdfs:7)
prp-eqp2: p1 owl:equivalentProperty p2 . x p2 y . => x p1 y			(inverse of prp-eqp1)
cax-sco: c1 rdfs:subClassOf c2 . x rdf:type c1 . => x rdf:type c2			(like rdfs9)
cax-eqc1: c1 owl:equivalentClass c2 . x rdf:type c1 . => x rdf:type c2	(new, like rdfs9)
cax-eqc2: c1 owl:equivalentClass c2 . x rdf:type c2 . => x rdf:type c1	(inverse of caxeqc1)

It seems that we've lost equivalents for rdfs7 and rdfs11 along the way. I don't recall that this was intentional, but perhaps I missed something. It seems to me, we should add the following rules to the document:

scm-spo: p1 rdfs:subPropertyOf p2 . p2 rdfs:subPropertyOf p3 . => p1 rdfs:subPropertyOf p3 (like rdfs5)
scm-sco: c1 rdfs:subClassOf c2 . c2 rdfs:subClassOf c3 . => c1 rdfs:subClassOf c3 (like rdfs11)


On Nov 15, 2011, at 9:36 AM, RDF Web Applications Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:

> ISSUE-116 (vocab-owl): Consider owl terms for vocab expansion [2nd LC Comment - RDFa Core 1.1]
> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/116
> Raised by: Ivan Herman
> On product: 2nd LC Comment - RDFa Core 1.1
> Add owl:equivalentClass and owl:equivalentProperty to the allowed terms for vocabulary expansion
> See the mail of Dan Brickley: http://www.w3.org/mid/CAFNgM+akmboWOgi5vSchetZHUFeiwORHDAHazR0DZAcCCnj33w@mail.gmail
> Relevant responses:
> http://www.w3.org/mid/2BF38B67-9AB6-49DC-9AFD-EEDCF3E15C92@w3.org
> http://www.w3.org/mid/4EC14415.9060609@aptest.com
> http://www.w3.org/mid/DEDB6120-6BEE-47CE-AE83-B9CF8D52D849@greggkellogg.net
Received on Friday, 9 December 2011 02:44:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:05:28 UTC