- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 10:47:29 -0500 (EST)
- To: jjc@hpl.hp.com
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com> Subject: Mapping rules bug-ette and fix? Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 15:49:42 +0100 > I think the mapping rules document has a little tension between its two > sections concerning triples of the form > > <p> rdf:type owl:ObjectProperty . > > and > > <p> rdf:type owl:DatatypeProperty . > > > == > > The textual description says > > [[ > A node x in G is an object property if x is a URI reference and there is a > triple of the form x rdf:type owl:ObjectProperty . > ]] > > and > > [[ > A node x in G is a datatype property if x is a URI reference and there is a > triple of the form x rdf:type owl:DatatypeProperty . > ]] > > This seems consistent with various e-mails from Peter. > > However, the mapping rules themselves when applied to > > Individual( ( <p> Individual() ) ) > produce > > _:b <p> T(Individual()) . > > i.e. > > _:b <p> _:c . > > === > > If the intent is that all properties should be typed, then I suggest that > the two individual rules be changed, e.g. > from > _:x T(<annotation1>) . _:x T(<annotationn>) . > _:x rdf:type T(<type1>) . _:x rdf:type T(<typen>) . > _:x <pID1> T(<value1>) . _:x <pIDn> T(<valuen>) . > > to > _:x T(<annotation1>) . _:x T(<annotationn>) . > _:x rdf:type T(<type1>) . _:x rdf:type T(<typen>) . > _:x T(<pID1>) T(<value1>) . _:x T(<pIDn>) T(<valuen>) . > > > > Jeremy Yes, this would work, and would make for a better mapping. It will show up later today. peter
Received on Friday, 17 January 2003 10:47:44 UTC