Re: Disjointnesses in OWL-S

> [Daniel Elenius]
> 
> I think the OWL-S ontology needs some more disjointness axioms on a lot 
> of its subclasses. 
> ...
> In Expression.owl:
> DRS-Expression, KIF-Expression, SWRL-Expression - these should be disjoint.

DRS expressions and SWRL expressions are XML Literals.  It would be
nice to say that KIF expressions are string literals, but I seem to
remember some obscure reason why we couldn't do that.  Anyway, that
would make them disjoint.

It's not completely obvious that DRS and SWRL expressions _are_
disjoint.  There's really no need for two separate notation systems
here.  One encodes first-order logic and the other encodes logic
programming (roughly speaking), and one could argue that these should
be two subsets of the same notation system.  Currently DRS borrows a
few classes from SWRL, and the overlap should be bigger.

                                             -- Drew


-- 
                                             -- Drew McDermott
                                                Yale University CS Dept.

Received on Thursday, 23 September 2004 15:43:48 UTC