- 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