- From: Sean Bechhofer <sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 16:55:09 +0100
- To: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
- Cc: SWD Working SWD <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
Dear Michael Thank you for your comments [1,ISSUE-137]: """ Property disjointness is not expressible in OWL Full. This should be discussed somewhere in the document, I think. Property disjointness is, however, planned to be expressible in OWL 2. """ ------------------------------------------------------------- As you point out, there are some constraints in the SKOS data model that we are unable to express in OWL (some of these /may/ be addressed by OWL 2, but in the current SKOS specification we are avoiding reference to work in progress). In such cases, the constraints are expressed in prose in the document. Property disjointness is precisely one of these cases. Statements to this effect are made in Section 1.7.1 of the LC draft. Do you feel these are sufficient, or do we need to further elaborate this point? The Working Group propose to *postpone* this issue, indicating that this may be an area that future groups may wish to return to. Are you willing to live with this? Cheers, Sean Bechhofer Alistair Miles [ISSUE-137] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/137 [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0044.html -- Sean Bechhofer School of Computer Science University of Manchester sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/people/bechhofer
Received on Friday, 17 October 2008 15:56:53 UTC