- From: Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) <dbooth@hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 13:46:47 +0000
- To: Sean Bechhofer <sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk>
- CC: "public-swd-wg@w3.org" <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
Hi Sean, Good point and explanation! So skos:broader does have *some* transitivity, but it is only transitive to the extent that a skos:broader relations is a skos:broaderTransitive relation -- the semantics of skos:broader that are distinct from the semantics of skos:broaderTranstive are not transitive. It might be worth adding or linking to your explanation in a future draft, since others may puzzle over this also. Thanks David Booth, Ph.D. HP Software +1 617 629 8881 office | dbooth@hp.com http://www.hp.com/go/software Statements made herein represent the views of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of HP unless explicitly so stated. > -----Original Message----- > From: Sean Bechhofer [mailto:sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk] > Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 5:18 AM > To: Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) > Cc: public-swd-wg@w3.org > Subject: Re: SKOS Comment: skos:broader as subproperty of > broaderTransitive seems backwards > > > On 1 Dec 2008, at 07:50, Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) wrote: > > > > > In > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-skos-reference-20080829/#L2413 > > it says that "skos:broader is not a transitive property", but > > "skos:broader is a sub-property of skos:broaderTransitive, which is > > a transitive property". Isn't this backwards? > > > > By the entailment rules for rdfs:subPropertyOf > > http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#rulerdfs7 > > if: > > skos:broader rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:broaderTransitive . > > uuu skos:broader yyy . > > > > then necessarily: > > > > uuu skos:broaderTransitive yyy . > > David > > A subproperty of a transitive property is not necessarily transitive. > As you rightly point out, if I have > > xxx skos:broader yyy > > then I can infer > > xxx skos:broaderTransitive yyy > > However, this doesn't mean skos:broader is transitive. If a relation > R is transitive, it means that from xRY and yRz, we can infer xRz. So > the situation with broader is as follows. > > If I have > > xxx skos:broader yyy > yyy skos:broader zzz > > then I can infer (through subproperties) that > > xxx skos:broaderTransitive yyy > yyy skos:broaderTransitive zzz > > Now, due to the transitivity of broaderTransitive, I can infer > > xxx skos:broaderTransitive zzz > > This *doesn't* mean that xxx skos:broader zzz, so I don't > (necessarily) have transitivity of skos:broader. > > The WG spent some time discussing this. We believe that there are > situations where we do not necessarily want skos:broader to be > transitive, but the pattern we have used allows us to /query/ across > something which includes the transitive closure of skos:broader, > without us having to assert that skos:broader is itself transitive. > We believe that this is the desirable situation. > > Hope that helps. > > Sean > > -- > Sean Bechhofer > School of Computer Science > University of Manchester > sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk > http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/people/bechhofer > > > >
Received on Monday, 1 December 2008 13:48:10 UTC