- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 15:19:49 +0100
- To: "Guus Schreiber" <schreiber@swi.psy.uva.nl>
- Cc: <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Thanks, that looks like a mistake - I will try changing it ... When I do so I will assess the impact on the triple table ... Currently in OWL Lite I am only allowing classID owl:sameClassAs classID . with owl:sameClassAs in the triple table. The additional AS&S rule permits classID owl:sameClassAs restriction . but restriction owl:sameClass classID . or restriction owl:sameClass restriction . are both in OWL DL. Jeremy > -----Original Message----- > From: Guus Schreiber [mailto:schreiber@swi.psy.uva.nl] > Sent: 13 February 2003 13:44 > To: Jeremy Carroll > Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org > Subject: Re: OWL Syntax > > > Jeremy, > > One small point. > > Pter's mapping rules for complete classes generate a > "owl:equivalalentClass" triple in case there is only one "super" and an > "owl:intersectionOf" triple in case of multiple "supers". You seem to do > always the latter, which appears semantically correct, but seems less > clear from the user point of view,. > > Guus > > Jeremy Carroll wrote: > > > > Finally I have managed to (not quite) finish my work on OWL syntax ... > > > > The entry point to a multipart document is: > > > > http://sealpc09.cnuce.cnr.it/jeremy/owl-syntax/2003-12-Feb/intro.html > > > > I have also copied the document to the www-archive > > > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2003Feb/0047.html > > > > Sorry it took so long. > > > > Jeremy > > > > > > > > -- > A. Th. Schreiber, SWI, University of Amsterdam, > http://www.swi.psy.uva.nl/usr/Schreiber/home.html > >
Received on Thursday, 13 February 2003 09:20:15 UTC