- From: Yuzhong Qu <yzqu@seu.edu.cn>
- Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 11:18:53 +0800
- To: "Rogier Brussee" <rogier.brussee@gmail.com>
- Cc: "SWIG" <semantic-web@w3.org>, "Dan Brickley" <danbri@w3.org>, "Henry Story" <henry.story@bblfish.net>, <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
> > It seems to me that: > > > > what CIFP means is very close to that intersectionOf(r1, r2, ..., rn) is a reverse functional property. > > > [snip] > Except that it is not so clear what the domain (i.e. "outcome") of :cifp is. > [snip] > It seems to me that the "combined inversefunctional property" is not a > primitive notion. It seems more natural and general to have a notion > of productProperty (or combined property) which can in particular be > inverse functional. Thus I would replace the last sentence by : > > :p :productProperty (:r1:r2). > :p a owl:InverseFunctionalProperty. > > :productProperty should model a list of simulaneous properties, and it > seems easiest if it takes values in a list. To be of any use as an > inverse functional property we have to assume that two lists are > owl:sameAs if their entries are owl:sameAs and have the same order, > just as Yuzhong Qu seems to suggest. However, intersectionOf(r1, r2, ..., rn) is a relation on the domain, while productPropertyOf(r1, r2, ..., rn) is a relation on the product of (Domain, ..., Domain) [Note that it leads to the ordered list issue]. And some DLs do support the role constructor "intersectionOf". [snip] Of couese, your scheme is also sound, at least seems to me. Yuzhong Qu
Received on Thursday, 17 February 2005 03:18:36 UTC