- From: Ron Alford <ronwalf@wam.umd.edu>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 13:42:00 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@swi.psy.uva.nl>
- cc: public-webont-comments@w3.org
Hello, I'm satisfied with this reponse. -Ron On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Guus Schreiber wrote: > Ron Alford wrote: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/2003May/0070.html > > > Hello, > > Since there is an owl:AllDifferent, why is there not an owl:AllSame? > I have a need for it on my current project. It would be nice for it > to have similar semantics to owl:AllDifferent. > > > > Thanks, > > - Ron Alford > > > > -- > > Ron Alford, KB0NUV > > http://volus.net/~ronwalf > > > Ron, > > Thanks for your comment. > > We introduced a AllDifferent construct because of the exponential growth > of the number of differentFrom statements; see Sec. 6.3 of OWL Reference [1] > > [[ > For ontologies in which the unique-names assumption holds, the use of > owl:differentFrom is likely to lead to a large number of statements, as > all individuals have to be declared pairwise disjoint. > ]] > > The case is different for sameAs, because sameAs only leads to linear > growth of the number of statements. (due to the transitive nature of > sameAs, the statements "a sameAs b" and "b sameAs c" already imply "a > sameAs c"). > > Please respond, copying public-webont-comments@w3.org, as to whether > you are satisfied with this response. > > Guus Schreiber > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#AllDifferent-def > > -- Ron Alford, KB0NUV http://volus.net/~ronwalf
Received on Friday, 20 June 2003 13:42:06 UTC