- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 11:05:51 -0400
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, jjc@hpl.hp.com
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
At 11:37 AM -0400 9/16/03, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com> >Subject: comment on O >Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 16:57:14 +0200 > >> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-owl-semantics-20030818/mapping.html#4.1 >> >> 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. > >peter 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 hendler@cs.umd.edu 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) http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler *** NOTE CHANGED CELL NUMBER ***
Received on Wednesday, 17 September 2003 11:05:59 UTC