- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 17:38:22 -0500 (EST)
- To: jos.deroo@agfa.com
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org, www-webont-wg-request@w3.org
From: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo@agfa.com> Subject: Re: possible changes to abstract syntax and direct semantics to support annotations and fix problem with imports Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 20:11:59 +0100 [...] > does the merge of the following OWL Lite graph > > :x rdf:type owl:Thing. > :a rdf:type owl:ObjectProperty. > :b rdf:type owl:Thing. > :c rdf:type owl:ObjectProperty. > :d rdf:type owl:Thing. > :x :a :b. # annotation triple > :x :c :d. # annotation triple Annotation triples are really part of the abstract syntax, not the triple syntax. In any case, the above graph is not an OWL Lite graph under my proposal. > with the following OWL Lite graph > > :x rdf:type owl:Thing. > :y rdf:type owl:ObjectProperty. > :z rdf:type owl:Thing. > :x :y :z. Neither is its merge with the above graph. > OWL Lite/DL entail > :x rdf:type owl:Thing. > :y rdf:type owl:ObjectProperty. > :z rdf:type owl:Thing. > :x :y :z. Well, given that the consequent is a subset of the antecedants, this is certainly a valid entailment in the RDF-compatible semantics. [...] > does the merge of the following OWL Lite graph > > :x rdf:type owl:Thing. > :y rdf:type owl:ObjectProperty. > :z rdf:type owl:Thing. > :x :y :z. # annotation triple This is not an OWL Lite graph under my proposal. > with the following OWL Lite graph > > :y rdf:type owl:ObjectProperty. > :v rdf:type owl:ObjectProperty. > :y rdfs:subPropertyOf :v. > > OWL Lite entail > > :x rdf:type owl:Thing. > :v rdf:type owl:ObjectProperty. > :z rdf:type owl:Thing. > :x :v :z. This is a valid entailment in the RDFS-compatible semantics. > > [...] > > -- , > Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/ peter
Received on Sunday, 9 February 2003 17:38:57 UTC