- From: Roger L. Costello <costello@mitre.org>
- Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 08:33:28 -0500
- To: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
- CC: "Costello,Roger L." <costello@mitre.org>
Thanks Mike. I am not real comfortable that you have completely answered my question, so let me followup with the example that you presented. You have stated that "hasFather" is a FunctionalProperty. Consider these two instances: <Person rdf:ID="Mike"> <hasFather> <Person rdf:ID="Joe"> <age>56</age> </Person> </hasFather> </Person> <Person rdf:ID="Mike"> <hasFather> <Person rdf:ID="Joseph"> <address>101 Curl Drive, Columbus, OH</address> </Person> </hasFather> </Person> Since "hasFather" has been declared to be a FunctionalProperty can we infer that this: <Person rdf:ID="Joe"> <age>56</age> </Person> is equivalent to this: <Person rdf:ID="Joseph"> <address>101 Curl Drive, Columbus, OH</address> </Person> Thus, when inferencing do we treat the values of "hasFather" as a "black box", or must we "reconcile" the values? /Roger Mike Dean wrote: > > A better example for FunctionalProperty is probably > hasFather. If I know that > > :hasFather rdf:type owl:FunctionalProperty > :mike :hasFather :joe > :mike :hasFather :joseph > > I can then conclude that > > :joe owl:sameIndividualAs :joseph > > Such cardinality reasoning with data type properties is less > useful, although the modelling aspects of "at most 1" can > also be very important (as seen in most programming > languages and database systems). > > Also, I would recommend that folks avoid using a value like > "6300 kilometers" in favor of a representation that made > 6300 an XML Schema numeric datatype (e.g. xsd:decimal) > suitable for arithematic computation and :kilometers an > instance that could then be related to other instances such > as :miles and :meters. > > Mike
Received on Wednesday, 5 March 2003 08:32:28 UTC