RE: ISSUE-65 (excess vocab): REPORTED: excessive duplication of vocabulary

Hello,

But dc:creator is usually an annotation property, right? I was here referring to object and data properties.

Also, you are free to come up with whatever usage restrictions/semantics for OWL 1.1 Full. OWL 1.1 DL, however, must be two-sorted:
the interpretation domains of the abstract and the concrete ___domain must be disjoint. This is a hard decidability requirement. Thus,
in OWL 1.1 DL, whenever you use a piece of vocabulary, you really need to know whether this usage refers to the abstract or the
concrete ___domain. Given this fundamental requirement of OWL 1.1 DL, you have two possibilities.

1. You can type the usage of the vocabulary. In this case, you can write both

ObjectSomeValuesFrom( dc:creator A )

and

DataSomeValuesFrom( dc:creator A ).

Because the usage is typed, you know that in the first case you really meant "the variant of dc:creator which connects two
individuals", and in the second case you really meant "the variant of dc:creator which connects an individual with a data value".

This is what we did in the proposed OWL 1.1 spec, but people didn't like it and they deem it to be ugly.


2. You can require a strict separation of the vocabulary. In this case, you can write

SomeValuesFrom( dc:creator A );

however, in order to know how to interpret dc:creator, you need to have an explicit type for it, which can be *either*
owl:ObjectProperty *or* owl:DatatypeProperty.

This is what I proposed as a potential solution to the ugliness problem, but alas, people again seem not to like it.

Well, I don't see a third possibility (other than lumping the concrete and the abstract interpretation together, which is just not
an option for OWL 1.1 DL); however, if someone has an idea how to get out of this conundrum, I'm all ears.

	Boris

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeremy Carroll [mailto:jjc@hpl.hp.com]
> Sent: 22 November 2007 10:42
> To: Boris Motik
> Cc: 'OWL Working Group WG'
> Subject: Re: ISSUE-65 (excess vocab): REPORTED: excessive duplication of vocabulary
> 
> Boris Motik wrote:
> 
> > I do not expect that users will actually want to use the same URI as both
> > an object and a data property.
> 
> My users do.
> 
> e.g. dc:creator is sometimes used with a string, being the name, and
> sometimes with a more complex object
> 
> Perhaps my users don't count?
> 
> Jeremy

Received on Thursday, 22 November 2007 10:59:31 UTC