Re: comment on O

At 11:37 AM -0400 9/16/03, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>From: Jeremy Carroll <>
>Subject: comment on O
>Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 16:57:14 +0200
>>  The second rule seems to *require* that every ontology includes a triple
>>  xxx rdf:type owl:Ontology .
>>  where xxx is either the name of the ontology or a blank node.
>>  This does not appear to be the intent elsewhere.
>Hmm.  Where elsewhere?
>>  The triple
>>  O rdf:type owl:Ontology .
>>  could be included in the Annotation rules instead.
>Yes, this would fix a potential problem if the above is optional with
>annotations on anonymous ontologies.
>>  Jeremy
>I am actually in favour of making the type triple optional in this
>production.  I think that it would require a working group decision at this
>point, however.

I would be happy to see it made optional, my second choice would be 
to document the heck out of this -- it is now becoming so easy to 
accidently put things in OWL Full because of things like this (or 
like putting a max and min cardinality in the same restriction) -- I 
think the main "fix" is to make sure that where there are things like 
this, and we see them happen multiple times, we try to add some words 
to Guide and/or Ref -- this makes the changes purely editorial 
without changing our design

Professor James Hendler
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  *** 240-277-3388 (Cell)      *** NOTE CHANGED CELL NUMBER ***

Received on Wednesday, 17 September 2003 11:05:59 UTC