ISSUE-2: RESOLVED: No syntax for AllDisjoint in RDF mapping
allDisjoint-RDF
RESOLVED: No syntax for AllDisjoint in RDF mapping
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- Raised by:
- Bijan Parsia
- Opened on:
- 2007-10-24
- Description:
- See:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-dev/2007JanMar/0131.html (thread)
Since AllDisjoint is (important) syntactic sugar, the lack thereof essentially eliminates it from the
RDF syntax. The trade-off is backwards compatibility. [But this is a desired backward
incompatability :)] - Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- RE: ISSUE-2 (allDisjoint-RDF): No syntax for AllDisjoint in RDF mapping (from schneid@fzi.de on 2008-01-15)
- Re: ISSUE-2 (allDisjoint-RDF): No syntax for AllDisjoint in RDF mapping (from jjc@hpl.hp.com on 2008-01-15)
- Re: ISSUE-2 (allDisjoint-RDF): No syntax for AllDisjoint in RDF mapping (from pfps@research.bell-labs.com on 2008-01-14)
- needs for roundtripping (from pfps@research.bell-labs.com on 2007-11-13)
- RE: ISSUE-2 (allDisjoint-RDF): No syntax for AllDisjoint in RDF mapping (from boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk on 2007-11-13)
- Re: ISSUE-2 (allDisjoint-RDF): No syntax for AllDisjoint in RDF mapping (from hendler@cs.rpi.edu on 2007-11-12)
- Re: ISSUE-2 (allDisjoint-RDF): No syntax for AllDisjoint in RDF mapping (from hendler@cs.rpi.edu on 2007-11-12)
- Re: ISSUE-2 (allDisjoint-RDF): No syntax for AllDisjoint in RDF mapping (from jjc@hpl.hp.com on 2007-11-12)
- Re: ISSUE-2 (allDisjoint-RDF): No syntax for AllDisjoint in RDF mapping (from hendler@cs.rpi.edu on 2007-11-11)
- Re: ISSUE-2 (allDisjoint-RDF): No syntax for AllDisjoint in RDF mapping (from ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk on 2007-11-11)
- RE: ISSUE-2 (allDisjoint-RDF): No syntax for AllDisjoint in RDF mapping (from boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk on 2007-11-07)
- Re: ISSUE-2 (allDisjoint-RDF): No syntax for AllDisjoint in RDF mapping (from sattler@cs.man.ac.uk on 2007-11-07)
- Re: ISSUE-2 (allDisjoint-RDF): No syntax for AllDisjoint in RDF mapping (from pfps@research.bell-labs.com on 2007-11-07)
- Re: ISSUE-2 (allDisjoint-RDF): No syntax for AllDisjoint in RDF mapping (from boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk on 2007-11-07)
- Re: Agenda requests: Issues we can decide? (from hendler@cs.rpi.edu on 2007-11-07)
- Re: Agenda requests: Issues we can decide? (from bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk on 2007-11-07)
- Re: Agenda requests: Issues we can decide? (from pfps@research.bell-labs.com on 2007-11-07)
- Re: overview document on Wiki (from hendler@cs.rpi.edu on 2007-10-30)
- Re: overview document on Wiki (from pfps@research.bell-labs.com on 2007-10-30)
- Re: ISSUE-2 (allDisjoint-RDF): No syntax for AllDisjoint in RDF mapping (from bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk on 2007-10-24)
- ISSUE-2 (allDisjoint-RDF): No syntax for AllDisjoint in RDF mapping (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2007-10-24)
Related notes:
Note: it is important to realize that AllDisjoint is not the same as DisjointUnion, the first simply states that a number of classes are separate, the latter necessarily means that something in the DisjointUnion must be in one of those classes - these are not semantically identical.
James Hendler, 30 Oct 2007, 16:00:52I don't think that the issue is that the RDF syntax is missing functionality, just that it is missing some possibly useful syntactic sugar, similar to owl:AllDifferent. I seem to remember that the WebOnt WG considered adding owl:AllDisjoint but decided that it was not sufficiently useful to add. The reason for adding owl:AllDifferent was that there could be *very* large groups of individual names being stated to be different, as in, e.g., a unique names assumption axiom.
Peter Patel-Schneider, 30 Oct 2007, 18:14:48RESOLUTION: AllDisjoint will be added to the functional syntax and the RDF mapping
See http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Teleconference.2007.11.07/Minutes
Ongoing discussion about other nary constructs.
Ian Horrocks, 23 Nov 2007, 10:27:08Closed as per:
http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=Mapping_to_RDF_Graphs&diff=3128&oldid=3126
Display change log
