- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 08:50:56 -0600
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
On Thu, 2003-01-30 at 01:48, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > Summary: Annotations are normal datatype or obejct properties which do not > syntactically participate in any restrictions, or have inverses, or be > declared as transitive or symmetric. They are given the semantics from RDFS. > > > The "any restrictions" covers domain, range, FunctionalProperty etc. > ====================================================== > > My prefered solution for annotations is as follows: > > For textual annotations, such as rdfs:comment and rdfs:label, the properties > used in the annotations are declared as owl:DatatypeProperty's in the usual > way. (The two rdfs props are builtin and do not need to be declared) When > used on individuals the triple corresponds to a propertyValue in the abstract > syntax, and is given meaning by the direct semantics. When used on an > ontology, class or property the triple corresponds to an annotation in the > abstract syntax. [...] This looks workable. Though I'm actually not all that clear on what the problem is. I'd appreciate some examples. Ah... ok, the one from your message of 26Jan http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Jan/0475.html cited from your proposed issue of 27Jan makes it clear enough to me what the problem is. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 30 January 2003 09:51:32 UTC