- From: ben syverson <w3@likn.org>
- Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 09:32:04 -0500
- To: semantic-web@w3.org
Hi, On Sep 7, 2006, at 12:37 AM, Paul Gearon wrote: > No, I think the specs are actually OK on this. After all, > restrictions are formed through subclassing, and subclassing is > transitive. It has a clear mathematical meaning. Saying anything > else is redundant. Maybe for the actual specs, but the OWL Guide goes out of its way to mention "Multiple domains mean that the ___domain of the property is the intersection of the identified classes (and similarly for range)." [1] I think the OWL guide, if not the specs, would have been an appropriate place to bring up the consequences of multiple conflicting restrictions on the same property and inherited restrictions. > Collecting a lot of the misunderstandings together, and explaining > both the correct interpretation and WHY this interpretation is > valid would be very valuable to people learning OWL. I agree completely. Something like an "OWL Implications" document, or even an "OWL Best Practices." - ben [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-guide-20040210/#DefiningProperties
Received on Thursday, 7 September 2006 14:32:14 UTC