- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 11:25:28 +0100
- To: <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Thinking some more I came across the following (potential) mismatch between OWL DL and OWL Full: ==== OWL Full: Empty graph owl-full entails rdfs:Literal rdfs:subClassOf owl:Thing ==== OWL DL Empty graph OWL-DL entails owl:Thing rdf:type owl:Class . owl:Thing rdfs:subClassOf _:x . _:x owl:complementOf rdfs:Literal . ==== Maybe this can be fixed by having: rdfs:Literal rdf:type owl:Datatype . in both .... (or is that already there ...) [This relates to my previous message about definition of OWL DL in that a crucial OWL DL entailment in my proposal [1] might be: <a> <p> "foo" . OWL DL entails <p> rdfs:range rdfs:Literal . which seems to be related to the case above. It also is not an OWL Full entailment. (The related entailement with <p> rdf:type owl:DatatypeProperty . in the conclusions may or not be an OWL full entailment depending on the defn of owl:DatatypeProperty in OWL Full. ] Jeremy [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/0255.html
Received on Friday, 20 December 2002 05:22:06 UTC