- 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