DTTF: List Ontology test case

• From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
• Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 14:18:52 +0100
• To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <JAEBJCLMIFLKLOJGMELDGENHCDAA.jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>

>
> I still need to send a message introducing the "List Ontology" test case.

I think of daml:Lists as a vocabulary:
  daml:first
  daml:rest
  daml:List
  daml:nil

and as an ontology for using this vocab that could be described in daml.

e.g.

(using rdf:aboutq with qnames instead of rdf:about with URIrefs!)

<daml:Class rdf:about="#EmptyList">
   <daml:oneOf>
     <rdf:Description rdf:aboutq="daml:nil">
   </daml:oneOf>
</daml:Class>
<daml:Class rdf:aboutq="daml:List">
  <daml:unionOf rdf:parseType="daml:collection">
    <daml:Class rdf:about="#EmptyList"/>
    <daml:Class rdf:about="#NonEmptyList"/>
  </daml:unionOf>
</daml:Class>
<daml:ObjectProperty rdf:aboutq="daml:rest>
  <daml:range rdf:resourceq="daml:List"/>
</daml:ObjectProperty>
<daml:ObjectProperty rdf:aboutq="daml:first"/>
<daml:Class rdf:about="#NonEmptyList">
  <daml:sameClassAs>
    <daml:Restriction>
      <daml:onProperty rdf:resourceq="daml:rest"/>
      <daml:hasValue rdf:resourceq="daml:Thing"/>
    </daml:Restriction>
  </daml:sameClassAs>
</daml:Class>

etc. etc.

Ths test case is meant to capture that intent.
If daml:Lists are dark, then this sort of ontology has little formal
meaning.

Jeremy

Received on Thursday, 25 April 2002 09:19:21 UTC