- From: Sean Bechhofer <seanb@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 11:16:43 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
- To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
In the S&AS, an ontology is defined as:
[[
ontology ::= 'Ontology(' [ ontologyID ] { directive } ')'
]]
Additionally, we have the mapping rules that say:
[[
Ontology(O directive1.. directiven) -> O rdf:type owl:Ontology .
T(directive1) … T(directiven)
Ontology(directive1 ... directiven) -> O rdf:type owl:Ontology .
T(directive1) … T(directiven)
]]
This would suggest to me that every DL/Lite ontology represented as
OWL-RDF must have *at least one* type triple with owl:Ontology as object.
However, many of the test case ontologies don't. For example, picking one
at random:
http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/someValuesFrom/premises001.rdf
has no owl:Ontology triples, but is labelled as Lite (and all our syntax
checkers agree that it is Lite).
Have I missed something somewhere, or have we all by chance managed to
successfully not implement the same feature.....?
Cheers,
Sean
--
Sean Bechhofer
seanb@cs.man.ac.uk
http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~seanb
Received on Tuesday, 7 October 2003 06:15:31 UTC