- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2004 15:38:31 +0100
- To: "Uschold, Michael F" <michael.f.uschold@boeing.com>
- Cc: Sean Bechhofer <seanb@cs.man.ac.uk>, Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>, public-swbp-wg@w3.org
Uschold, Michael F wrote: > > Jeremy: you said that there are problems with trying to do this with OWL-Full. Can you give a simple example that shows the problem? > Here's a very simple one: Saying that Pat Hayes is the author of RDF Semantics may be said in RDF with a single triple: <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt> dc:creator "Pat Hayes" . To say that in OWL AS we may well end up with something like individual( <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt> annotation( dc:creator "Pat Hayes" ) ) The difficulty is that the mapping rules automatically will generate dc:creator rdf:type owl:AnnotationProperty . as well as the triple we want and some other fairly harmless triples. A different way of saying a similar thing in the AS would be: individual( <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt> value( dc:creator "Pat Hayes" ) ) And here we would need to have dc:creator as a datavalued property, giving the triple: dc:creator rdf:type owl:DatatypeProperty . Under the OWL Full semantics these two are not semantically identical (in fact neither entails the other), and neither is entailed by what might actually be written in a concrete document which might just be the single triple. Jeremy
Received on Wednesday, 7 April 2004 10:47:33 UTC