- From: Kevin D. Keck <kdkeck@lbl.gov>
- Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 13:46:42 -0800
- To: public-webont-comments@w3.org
It appears to me that OWL Lite and OWL DL provide no way to define a Property
with bounded (and/or ordered), type-restricted values, other than by
subclassing rdf:List or some similarly distateful kludge. For the same
reasons which compelled the RDF Core group to add rdf:List to RDF (and some
of which have led to a number of uses of Lists in OWL itself), I submit that
it's important for OWL to be able to fully support Lists as RDF primitives
distinct from owl:Classes.
For my current purposes, it would be entirely adequate to provide an
"owl:List" form to be used as a third kind of range restriction, in addition
to class descriptions and data ranges. It could have a single property (say
"owl:memberType") specifying a class description, data range, or nested list
description. E.g.:
<owl:ObjectProperty rdf:about="#cast">
<owl:domain rdf:resource="#Show"/>
<owl:range>
<owl:List>
<owl:memberType rdf:resource="#Actor"/>
</owl:List>
</owl:range>
</owl:ObjectProperty>
<ex:Show>
<ex:cast parseType="Collection">
<ex:Actor ex:name="Ahnuld"/>
<ex:Actor ex:name="Madonna"/>
</ex:cast>
</ex:Show>
Does this make sense (the proposal, not the example cast)?
--
Kevin D. Keck
http://vimss.lbl.gov/~kdkeck/
510-486-4856
Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2003 16:46:46 UTC