Comment on OWL formalism used in SKOS core

With reference to:
(sections 5.3, 5.6.1, 6.3 and 6.5.1)

I found the assertions "This example is ... incompatible with OWL DL ..." (sects 
5.6.1, 6.5.1) to be confusing when considering S8 (section 5.3) and S12 (section 
6.3).  This seems to be a contradiction:  constraining a SKOS term using an OWL 
formalism, then giving an example that is declared to be incompatible with some 
flavours of OWL, saying that these terms should then be treated as a different 
kind of OWL property ("To work within the OWL DL language, treat skos:prefLabel, 
skos:altLabel and skos:hiddenLabel as annotation properties").

Given this confusion (on my part, at least) I find myself wondering what value 
there is in defining these SKOS terms as instances of owl:DatatypeProperty (S8 
and S12).

I'm not sure what to suggest.  Maybe removing S8 and S12?


Graham Klyne
Contact info:

Received on Monday, 31 March 2008 11:39:34 UTC