- From: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@swi.psy.uva.nl>
- Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 16:22:18 +0100
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- CC: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > From: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@swi.psy.uva.nl> > Subject: Re: comments on ASS > Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 12:32:06 +0100 > > [...] > > >>>OWL Lite has had defined classes from the beginning. If the Guide >>>indicates otherwise, it needs to be fixed. >> >>So, this is a legal OWL Lite axiom according to the AS&S. If, so we have >>to correct this in the Guide. >> >><owl:Class rdf:ID="TexasThings"> >> <owl:sameClassAs> >> <owl:Restriction> >> <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#locatedIn" /> >> <owl:allValuesFrom rdf:resource="#TexasRegion" /> >> </owl:Restriction> >> </owl:sameClassAs> >></owl:Class> >> >>Note that this only holds for restrictions. Set operators or enumeration >>in this type of axiom would be non-lite. > > > Yes, the above is legal OWL Lite. Mike/Chris, This means the Guide example should be changed. If the example is changed to use intersection/union/complement/oneof, then it is in OWL/DL. Alternatively, you could keep the example and mark it as OWL DL. Guus -- A. Th. Schreiber, SWI, University of Amsterdam, http://www.swi.psy.uva.nl/usr/Schreiber/home.html
Received on Monday, 13 January 2003 10:29:14 UTC