- From: Benjamin Nowack <bnowack@appmosphere.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 14:50:05 +0200
- To: Danny Ayers <danny666@virgilio.it>
- Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
On 10.06.2004 13:37:41, Danny Ayers wrote: > >I can see why the meta aspects of RDF(S) can prevent a schema being >considered OWL DL, but I was wondering about the situation where a >class/property is defined using *both* RDFS and OWL constructs. It feels >like the inclusion of the OWL definition should apply the required >constraints, but my guess is that it doesn't - could someone please >clarify? Example below. I think the specs are quite clear, the reference for example says: [[ "In OWL Lite and OWL DL, owl:Class must be used for all class descriptions" ]] It seems to be more a syntactical than a semantical problem. >Assuming that including the RDFS-based definitions does poke a hole in >completeness, might it still be possible in practice to apply a >remove-if-unknown (no imports) kind of rule to the statements outside of >the OWL DL universe, and hence use DL reasoners on combined schemas that >way? from a theoretical point of view, I'd say your model is OK, but in practice it (as usual) depends on the tools you plan to use. If they provide a "clean-up before reasoning" function, it may well be OK to have something such as <rdfs:Class rdf:ID="MyLittleClass"> <rdf:type rdf:resource="&owl;Class"/> <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#MyBigClass"/> </rdfs:Class> A tool could then first read all the triples and then feed only owl:Classes to a classifier. And pure RDFS tools could simply treat OWL information like any other vocabulary or ignore it. But if the tools start screaming as soon as the encounter an rdfs:Class, then this approach -pragmatically spoken- just won't work. Did you already try your example on e.g. protege's OWL plug-in? I don't know if it could also happen that OWL-only tools regard rdfs:Classes as individuals, therefore screaming again (classes as individuals issue) or that they rip of the additional typing info, so that you couldn't re-serialize it this way again.. >The bottom line I guess is close to the (pending?) best practices >question - should you define schema against OWL Full or OWL DL or both? >Here the question is - if both, do they have to be separate? I think one of the problems for deployed apps is that even if we had DL/Lite-onts only, their combination could still result in an OWL Full model. So I guess the DL stuff is more for specialized apps that use some kind of manually maintained/controlled set of onts. I *think* that many deployed vocabularies will be in the style of the FOAF spec (rdfs:Classes with OWL information on top), maybe offering a separate OWL DL version for those using DL reasoners. (That's at least the scenario I'm optimizing my ont editor for.. ;) best, benjamin -- Benjamin Nowack Kruppstr. 100 45145 Essen, Germany > >Cheers, >Danny. > > ><rdf:RDF > xmlns = "http://example.org/test#" > xmlns:rdf = "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" > xmlns:rdfs = "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#" > xmlns:owl ="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#" > xml:base ="http://example.org/test#"> > > <owl:Ontology rdf:about=""/> > > <owl:Class rdf:ID="MyLittleClass"> > <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#MyBigClass"/> > </owl:Class> > > <owl:Class rdf:ID="MyBigClass"> > </owl:Class> > > <rdfs:Class rdf:ID="MyLittleClass"> > <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#MyBigClass"/> > </rdfs:Class> > > <rdf:Property rdf:ID="someCharacteristic"> > <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#MyBigClass"/> > <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#MyBigClass"/> > </rdf:Property> > > <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:ID="someCharacteristic"> > <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#MyBigClass"/> > <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#MyBigClass"/> > </owl:ObjectProperty> > > <rdf:Property rdf:ID="somethingLiteral"> > <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#MyBigClass"/> > <rdf:range rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"/> > </rdf:Property> > > <owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:ID="somethingLiteral"> > <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#MyBigClass"/> > <rdf:range rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"/> > </owl:DatatypeProperty> ></rdf:RDF> > >-- > >Raw >http://dannyayers.com > > >
Received on Thursday, 10 June 2004 08:50:45 UTC