- From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 12:36:08 +0000
- To: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
- CC: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, Marc <marc@geonames.org>, public-esw-thes@w3.org
Bernard Vatant wrote: > So, to sum it up, suppose I declare the following in the original ontology > > <owl:AnnotationProperty > rdf:about="http://www.example.org/ontology#altName"> > <rdfs:subPropertyOf > rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label"/> > </owl:AnnotationProperty> > > Loading and saving in SWOOP 2.3 yields back > > <owl:AnnotationProperty > rdf:about="http://www.example.org/ontology#altName"/> > > The subproperty declaration is deleted Does SWOOP warn you that this file is OWL/full and so can't be edited safely? > Loading and saving in Protégé 3.2 yields back > > <owl:AnnotationProperty > rdf:about="http://www.example.org/ontology#altName"> > <rdfs:subPropertyOf > rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label"/> > <rdf:type > rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#DatatypeProperty"/> > </owl:AnnotationProperty> > > The DatatypeProperty class is added In OWL/DL AnnotationProperty and DatatypeProperty are disjoint, so even though you are already in OWL/full this seems like a strange way to be behave. > Now if I don't want to presume the property type and just declare > > <rdf:Property rdf:about="http://www.example.org/ontology#altName"> > <rdfs:subPropertyOf > rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label"/> > </rdf:Property> > > SWOOP just ignores this declaration altogether, and the property is > killed when saving. This is OWL/full, again does SWOOP warn you it might loose OWL/full-isms? > Protégé does not show the property in the GUI, but Jena saves it in the > original form. Yes, Jena can happily read/write OWL/full files and certainly won't loose triples like that. > Well, all that is *very messy* indeed. Looks like that the semantics of > annotation subproperties is defined nowhere, and randomly implemented in > tools. Well in a sense the point of Annotation properties is that they don't really carry any semantics, that's why they can be safely used in DL. > I'm not even sure that a subproperty of an annotation > property is an annotation property. Is this entailed by RDFS semantics? No. > a:myProperty1 rdfs:subPropertyOf b:yourProperty2 > b:yourProperty2 rdf:type ex:SomePropertyType > > Does the above entails in RDFS > > a:myProperty1 rdf:type ex:SomePropertyType > > ?? (I guess yes, but maybe I'm wrong) No. For example, instead of ex:SomePropertyType consider owl:TransitiveProperty then there is no reason why a subProperty of a transitive property should itself be transitive. Dave [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#Annotations
Received on Monday, 8 January 2007 12:36:31 UTC