- From: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 10:59:41 +0100
- To: "Bernard Vatant" <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, "Www-Rdf-Logic@W3. Org" <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
Oops ... Please read below <owl:Class rdf:ID="InvisibleThing"> <owl:complementOf> <owl:Class rdf:about="#VisibleThing"/> </owl:complementOf> </owl:Class> instead of <owl:Class rdf:ID="InvisibleThing"> <owl:complementOf> <owl:Class rdf:about="#VisibleObject"/> </owl:complementOf> </owl:Class> Thanks Bernard Vatant Senior Consultant Knowledge Engineering Mondeca - www.mondeca.com bernard.vatant@mondeca.com > -----Message d'origine----- > De : www-rdf-logic-request@w3.org > [mailto:www-rdf-logic-request@w3.org]De la part de Bernard Vatant > Envoye : jeudi 18 decembre 2003 10:38 > A : Www-Rdf-Logic@W3. Org > Objet : owl:allValuesFrom and rdfs:domain > > > > > I need some help from experts in logic ... > > I've sent a few days ago a message about "TexasThings" example > in OWL Guide > (see below), where the interpretation of allValuesFrom seems wrong to me. > Without answer so far from there, I push the question here. > > Suppose I have the following - more enlightening to me at least > than Texas > Things :)) > > <owl:Class rdf:ID="BlueThing"> > <owl:equivalentClass> > <owl:Restriction> > <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#color" /> > <owl:allValuesFrom rdf:resource="#ShadeOfBlue" /> > </owl:Restriction> > </owl:equivalentClass> > </owl:Class> > > <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:ID="color"> > <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#VisibleThing"/> > </owl:ObjectProperty> > > What can be asserted between the classes BlueThing and VisibleThing ? > > Of course, if some BlueThing X has a value for "#color", then X is in the > domain of "#color". But using "allValuesFrom" means that some other > BlueThing Y may not have any value at all for this property. > How can this happen? Quite naturally, if Y is not a VisibleThing > one might > not be able to specify any value for its color. One knows somehow Y is a > BlueThing, without being able to specify any ShadeOfBlue. > > So a BlueThing is not necessarily a VisibleThing. > > There is more tricky. > > <owl:Class rdf:ID="InvisibleThing"> > <owl:complementOf> > <owl:Class rdf:about="#VisibleObject"/> > </owl:complementOf> > </owl:Class> > > Does the following triple hold? > > InvisibleThing rdfs:subClassOf BlueThing > > Sounds weird ... but I can't find any solid argument against it. > > Bernard > > Bernard Vatant > Senior Consultant > Knowledge Engineering > Mondeca - www.mondeca.com > bernard.vatant@mondeca.com > > > -----Message d'origine----- > Envoye : lundi 15 decembre 2003 19:21 > A : public-webont-comments@w3.org > Objet : TexasThings and owl:equivalentClass > > Seems to me that there is something wrong, or at least > misleading with the > example of "TexasThings" > http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/#equivalentClass1 > > <owl:Class rdf:ID="TexasThings"> > <owl:equivalentClass> > <owl:Restriction> > <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#locatedIn" /> > <owl:allValuesFrom rdf:resource="#TexasRegion" /> > </owl:Restriction> > </owl:equivalentClass> > </owl:Class> > > First it would certainly be better to have the singular > "TexasThing" rather > than plural "TexasThings" :) > > "TexasThings are exactly those things located in the Texas region ..." > > This is obviously wrong. There is an allValuesFrom, but not a > someValuesFrom here. As defined, it means : If TexasThings are located > somewhere, they are located in Texas region. > > An further on > > " ... The difference between using owl:equivalentClass here and using > rdfs:subClassOf is the difference between a necessary condition and a > necessary and sufficient condition. With subClassOf, things that are > located in Texas are not necessarily TexasThings. But, using > owl:equivalentClass, if something is located in Texas, then it must be in > the class of TexasThings." > > ... but not the other way round, unfortunately. > > In fact under this definition any thing located nowhere is a Texas Thing. > Thinking about it, maybe it makes sense after all. Nowhere is indeed in > Texas, and especially its middle ... :)) > > >
Received on Thursday, 18 December 2003 05:00:01 UTC