- From: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 16:53:19 +0100 (BST)
- To: Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>
- Cc: webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
On September 29, Frank van Harmelen writes: > > > > Ian Horrocks wrote: > > > the extensive use of oneOf in the wine and food > > ontologies is largely gratuitous (it seems to be mainly the result of > > their origin in a language that supported this constructor but did not > > support unions of classes), and is setting a bad example to > > prospective users - it encourages the use of statements that are, in > > most cases, stronger than is needed/intended, and that are known to be > > difficult to reason with. > > > > One further point. Given the elimination of oneOf, then the wine and > > food ontologies could even be transformed into OWL Lite, although this > > would result in some mangling of the syntax (in order to capture > > negation and disjunction). > > Jeremy Carroll wrote: > > > I have code for that if needed. > > I think all these points: > > 1) be careful with oneOf's > 2) without oneOf's, an ontology can often be transformed from DL into Lite > 3) that step can even be done automatically > > are all very good points to make in whatever "style/how-to" guide we will be > writing. Agreed, but w.r.t. point 1, our advice would carry more weight if we were seen to be taking it seriously in our own example ontologies! Ian > > Frank. > ---- > -- Ian Horrocks, Department of Computer Science, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK. Tel: +44 161 275 6133/6248 Fax: +44 161 275 6211 Email: horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk URL: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~horrocks
Received on Monday, 29 September 2003 11:51:46 UTC