- 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