- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 19 Sep 2002 09:04:10 -0500
- To: "Peter F. "Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
On Wed, 2002-09-11 at 11:45, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> I fixed a couple of problems in my semantics document, and reordered some
> of the material.
I wonder if it's essential to restrict these this way:
|owl:FunctionalProperty rdf:subClassOf owl:Property .
|owl:SymmetricProperty rdf:subClassOf owl:ObjectProperty .
|owl:InverseFunctionalProperty rdf:subClassOf owl:ObjectProperty .
Can we either
(a) not restrict these this way.
- note that folks can still declare their properties
to be both a FunctionalProperty and an owl:ObjectProperty.
(b) specify analogs that aren't restricted.
i.e. I'm still interested in replies to...
SEM/TEST: restricted complement, unrestricted InverseFunctionalProperty
Dan Connolly (Fri, Sep 06 2002)
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Sep/0075.html
Likewise for disjointFrom...
1. The class extension of owl:Thing is a subset of IR, does not
contain any RDF or OWL structural resources, and is disjoint
from the extensions of classes, properties, lists,
collections, statements, and literals.
1. for each name N in the rdf:, rdfs:, and owl: namespaces,
IS(N) is not in ICEXT(IS(owl:Thing))
2. ICEXT(IS(owl:Thing)) is disjoint from
ICEXT(IS(rdfs:Class))
3. ICEXT(IS(owl:Thing)) is disjoint from
ICEXT(IS(rdf:Property))
4. ICEXT(IS(owl:Thing)) is disjoint from ICEXT(IS(rdf:List))
5. ICEXT(IS(owl:Thing)) is disjoint from
ICEXT(IS(rdf:Collection))
6. ICEXT(IS(owl:Thing)) is disjoint from
ICEXT(IS(rdf:Statement))
7. ICEXT(IS(owl:Thing)) is disjoint from LV
It seems highly ironic, to me, that we have to state that informally.
If owl:disjointFrom were specified over the whole domain of
discourse, we could write, formally...
owl:Thing owl:disjointFrom rdfs:Class.
owl:Think owl:disjointFrom rdf:Property.
etc.
--
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 19 September 2002 10:05:01 UTC