Re: Concerning annotation properties

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Subject: Concerning annotation properties
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 15:36:59 +0300

> I wonder whether S&AS CR accurately reflects the issue resolution of OWL DL 
> Syntax, and whether it is in need of a minor correction.
> 
> 
> My concern is with the following two rules in the abstract syntax, (and their 
> associated mapping rules etc).
> 
> directive ::= ...
>          | 'Annotation(' annotationPropertyID URIreference ')'
> 
> and
> 
> annotation ::= 'annotation(' annotationPropertyID URIreference ')'

My recollection is that the reason S&AS allows untyped URI references here
is precisely because is was requested.

> As far as I can tell the agreed restriciton that 
> "types required on all non-builtin urirefs"
> is not effective in this case.

Agreed.

> I note that the issue resolution
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Mar/0066
> 
> explicitly requires this
> [[
> A.1 types required on all non-builtin urirefs
> A.3 object of annotation property can be any uriref (see 1) or literal
>      or blank node [xsd datatypes are builtins]
> ]]
> 
> The "(see 1)" being the explicit requirement.

Hmm.  I was under the impression that the resolution was worded the way it
was was to exempt annotation values from being correctly typed.

> I have added test AnnotationProperty-003 as a proposed test which currently 
> reflects my understanding of the issue resolution and not my understanding of 
> the OWL CR.  (included below)
> 
> I will modify as require by WG resolution.

Yes, there is a clash here.  I don't care which way the clash is resolved.
but there does need to be a resolution.

> Jeremy
> 
> ====
> 
> The following is a consistent OWL Full file.
> 
> <rdf:RDF
>     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
>     xmlns:owl="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#"      
> xmlns:first="http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/AnnotationProperty/consistent003#"
>     xml:base="http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/AnnotationProperty/consistent003" 
> >
> 
>   <owl:Class rdf:ID="A">
>     <first:ap>
>        <rdf:Description rdf:ID="B"/>
>     </first:ap>
>   </owl:Class>
>   <owl:AnnotationProperty rdf:ID="ap"/>
> 
> </rdf:RDF>

OWLP reports this as in Lite.

peter

Received on Monday, 29 September 2003 14:46:28 UTC