W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > October 2010

Re: Are literals owl:Things?

From: Jeremy Carroll <jeremy@topquadrant.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 11:08:02 -0700
Message-ID: <4CB74702.5010304@topquadrant.com>
To: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@deri.org>
CC: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>, Jesse Weaver <weavej3@rpi.edu>, semantic-web@w3.org
  On 10/14/2010 9:16 AM, Antoine Zimmermann wrote:
>
> Another way of answering the question (which I would coin the 
> "model-theoretic view") is to ask:
>
> are the interpretations of a rdfs:Literal included in the 
> interpretations of owl:Thing?

The model theory is not an interoperability point. They help define the 
interoperability points - entailments etc
To compare the interpretation of some URI in one model theory with the 
interpretation of the same URI in some other model theory is a category 
error ( ... the beginning of madness ... )
Questions about RDF or OWL model theory, are, from the point of view of 
the Web user, about as well formed as questions about angels and pinheads.

===

The crucial part of
http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-direct-semantics-20091027/#Interpretations
is the phrase:
"disjoint with /Δ_I / "

my assertion is that this phrase is not externally visible - I haven't 
checked that.

I wonder if this was an unnecessary addition. i.e. that all interesting 
theorems about OWL follow even if that part of the defn is omitted.

Jeremy
Received on Thursday, 14 October 2010 18:08:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:41:24 UTC