- 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