Re: Issue 3.4 - daml:UnambiguousProperty

On June 6, Jim Hendler writes:
> 
> At 11:18 AM +0100 6/6/02, Ian Horrocks wrote:
> >On May 29, Jim Hendler writes:
> >>
> >>  Issue 3.4 - daml:UnambiguousProperty
> >>
> >>    Proposal - CLOSE THIS ISSUE
> >>
> >>     The issue here was that the requirements document didn't motivate
> >>  this language feature.  However, no one has advocated its removal and
> >>  there does seem to be consensus it is a desirable feature.  It is
> >>  provided for in DAML+OIL and will be provided in OWL.
> >
> >
> >This issue may be tied to the INVERSE issue. UnambiguousProperty
> >really means functionality w.r.t. the inverse property. If we no
> >longer support inverse, then it seems a little strange to be able to
> >assert its functionality.
> >
> >Ian
> >
> 
> I'm confused about "no longer support inverse" -- we resolved the 
> inverse issue and decided we would indeed support it.

I was simply contributing some FACTUAL INFORMATION to what seems to be
an ongoing discussion about this issue; in particular I was responding
to [1]. Please note that I deliberately did not state any OPINION as
to how the issue should be resolved.

By the way, the issues page currently says:

 Name 
         4.5-InverseOf
 Raised By 
         James Hendler
 Date 
         19 Apr 2002
 Status 
         Open, 28 May 02
 Resolution 


Regards, Ian

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002May/0249.html


> 
>  From log of May 30 telecon-
> >a) ISSUE InverseOf
> >http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#4.5-InverseOf
> >
> >"InverseOf is a highly used (some say misused) feature of
> >DAML+OIL. The OWL-Full proposal left it out, because of some worries
> >on the part of some participants that it caused some logical problems
> >for users. Other people argue it is an important expression in the
> >mapping between ontologies."
> >
> >Proposed resolution by Dan Connoly:
> >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002May/0264.html
> >
> >
> >Ian: description seems to involve UniquelyIdentifyingPropert often with
> >respect to Datatypes.
> >
> >proposal is ammended in resolution 5.1 when used with datatypes still open,
> >elsewise close.
> >
> >closed in favor. closing text will be online. resolved.
> 
> so the only open issue is whether inverse is allowed with datatypes 
> (pending resolution of datatypes by RDF Core)
> 
>   -JH
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Professor James Hendler				  hendler@cs.umd.edu
> Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
> Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
> Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  240-731-3822 (Cell)
> http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler

Received on Thursday, 6 June 2002 10:29:08 UTC