Re: Restricted Metadata Inheritance by Named Graphs?

Hi Christoph,

If you're not particularly concerned with staying in OWL 2 DL, you can define a property chain that will allow you to infer the proper annotations.

Your rule below, can be defined as:

:fooProp owl:propertyChainAxiom (:inheritsMetadata :fooProp) .

This property chain is certainly not as generic as the rule because one such chain needs to be defined for each annotation property in your knowledge base (that's why I renamed ?property to :fooProp).

Why is this not OWL 2 DL? Because property chains cannot range over annotation properties, and they are not allowed to contain cycles (which is clearly the case here).

>> This would, however, easily cause trouble in an RDF world, as
>> 1. the two resources might be of different types, which might be disjoint in
>>   an OWL ontology, but what if ?resource inherits rdf:type from
>>   ?otherResource ?

The property chain defined above will not range over the rdf:type property (as your rule does)

>> 2. what if an inherited property is an OWL FunctionalProperty but has
>>   different values on ?resource and ?otherResource ?

Then a reasoner will infer owl:sameAs relations between the 'metadata'.

>> 3. what if the metadata explicitly stated in the scope (e.g. the same XML
>>   document) of ?otherResource are fine, but somebody else externally writes a
>>   triple ?otherResource :evilProperty "value" ?

Then you get to the issues pointed at by Steffen.



Dr Rinke Hoekstra

AI Department         |   Leibniz Center for Law    
Faculty of Sciences   |   Faculty of Law            
Vrije Universiteit    |   Universiteit van Amsterdam
De Boelelaan 1081a    |   Kloveniersburgwal 48      
1081 HV Amsterdam     |   1012 CX  Amsterdam        
+31-(0)20-5987752     |   +31-(0)20-5253497    |           


Received on Thursday, 3 December 2009 10:53:12 UTC