- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 11 Dec 2002 15:27:52 -0600
- To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
[[ Issue 5.18 - Unique names assumption ACTION: Dan Connolly to write up the 'all different' proposal for Issue 5.18. ]] -- 12Nov http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Nov/0157.html OK, trying to get all the relevant stuff on one page... let's start with the issue description... "The differentIndividualFrom form provides a way of enumerating pairwise disjointness between individuals. The abstract syntax document mentions DifferentIndividuals that takes a list as an argument that then states that all of the individuals in the list are distinct. Both of these options however still require a complete listing of all of the individuals that are distinct either stating pairwise disjointness of combining them in a list. This issue requests additional support for stating uniqueness." http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#I5.18-Unique-Names-Assumption-Support-in-OWL This proposal doesn't really address the issue. So it's a proposal to add a term to our language that mimics the abstract syntax feature described above, but then to POSTPONE the issue, since we don't have adequate implementation experience with designs for expressing things like "all the names in this namespace denote distinct things". Let's look at the oneOf section in the guide... http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/guide-src/Guide.html#EnumeratedClasses http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-owl-guide-20021104/#EnumeratedClasses The example there is ---------- <owl:Class rdf:ID="WineColor"> <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#WineDescriptor"/> <owl:oneOf rdf:parseType="Collection"> <owl:Thing rdf:about="#White"/> <owl:Thing rdf:about="#Rose"/> <owl:Thing rdf:about="#Red"/> </owl:oneOf> </owl:Class> ---------- note that this doesn't actually say that #White and #Rose are distinct things. So let's introduce a new property... Several of us liked "allDifferent" back on 12Nov, but I'd like the guide editors and such to noodle on better names, because it doesn't flow very well in context. Let's go with oneOfDistinct for now... <owl:Class rdf:ID="WineColor"> <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#WineDescriptor"/> <owl:oneOfDistinct rdf:parseType="Collection"> <owl:Thing rdf:about="#White"/> <owl:Thing rdf:about="#Rose"/> <owl:Thing rdf:about="#Red"/> </owl:oneOfDistinct> </owl:Class> I propose that the guide editor take an ACTION to integrate that example into the section on enumerated classes, salting to taste. Mike S, does that make sense? Likewise, the language reference editor will please take an ACTION to add something like this to our vocabulary/schema/owl.owl thingy: owl:oneOfDistinct a rdfs:Property; rdfs:label "all different"; rdfs:subPropertyOf owl:oneOf. Mike D, does that tell you what you need to know to update the reference doc? I dunno if it deserves discussion in the synopsis; it's not critical to me. But I'd like an ACTION for the feature synopsis editor to think about it. As to semantics, here's how I wrote in in N3 in my experiments (which, due to list handling bugs in cwm, never quite worked; Jos, maybe you can check my work here. I prefer not to use the math:index stuff.) { ?C owl:oneOfDistinct ?L } log:implies { ?L a :DistinctList }. { ?L a :DistinctList; l:rest ?L2 } log:implies { ?L2 a :DistinctList }. { ?L a :DistinctList; l:first ?X; l:rest [ l:first ?Y ] } log:implies { ?X owl:differentFrom ?Y }. I'm pretty sure Pat Hayes, among others, understands what I mean well enough to edit the semantics document accordingly. As to test cases, Jos seems to have at least two drafted... http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Nov/0041.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Nov/0021.html There. That's it. OK? -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 11 December 2002 16:27:37 UTC