- From: Mike Dean <mdean@bbn.com>
- Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 05:57:14 -0800
- To: "Roger L. Costello" <costello@mitre.org>
- cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
> I am not real comfortable that you have completely
> answered my question, so let me followup with the example that you
> presented.
Other folks can probably express this more formally, but my
take is that #Joseph and #Joe are equivalent (i.e.
owl:sameIndividualAs). An implementation could probably
then "merge" them, but it would often be preferable to link
the instances and follow the equivalence arcs during lookup.
> 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>
#Joe is equivalent to #Joseph. We haven't said anything
about the equivalence (e.g. owl:equivalentProperty) of #age
and #address.
> Thus, when inferencing do we treat the values of "hasFather" as a "black
> box", or must we "reconcile" the values?
I'm not sure what you mean by reconcile. Remember that
these are all graphs rather than XML structure.
It would also be reasonable to conclude
<Person rdf:ID="Joe">
<age>56</age>
<address>101 Curl Drive, Columbus, OH</address>
</Person>
<Person rdf:ID="Joseph">
<age>56</age>
<address>101 Curl Drive, Columbus, OH</address>
</Person>
i.e. "merging" the statements about the instances. This is
in fact implemented by the DAML+OIL layer in Jena.
Mike
Received on Wednesday, 5 March 2003 08:57:18 UTC