Can we layer a DAML+OIL model theory on top of RDF?

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider (pfps@research.bell-labs.com)
Date: 11/22/01 

I don't think so, because of the triples generated by DAML+OIL logical
constructs.


For example, consider

	<rdfs:Class foo>
	  <daml:intersectionOf rdf:parseType="daml:collection">
	    <daml:Class rdf:about="Man">
	    <daml:Class rdf:about="Woman">
          </daml:intersectionOf>
	</rdfs:Class>

This does not RDFS entail

	<rdfs:Class foo>
	  <daml:intersectionOf rdf:parseType="daml:collection">
	    <daml:Class rdf:about="Woman">
	    <daml:Class rdf:about="Man">
          </daml:intersectionOf>
	</rdfs:Class>

because the RDF-encoding of the collections involved.

Now, maybe we can live with this, as we don't really want to ask about
entailment between classes.


However, if we add 

	<foo rdf:about="John"/>

to both examples.  The entailment is still not there.

This is much more serious.


Even more serious is that

	<rdfs:Class foo>
	  <daml:intersectionOf rdf:parseType="daml:collection">
	    <daml:Class rdf:about="Man">
	    <daml:Class rdf:about="Woman">
          </daml:intersectionOf>
	</rdfs:Class>

	<foo rdf:about="John"/>

does not entail

	<foo rdf:about="John"
	  <rdf:type>
	    <daml:intersectionOf rdf:parseType="daml:collection">
	      <daml:Class rdf:about="Man">
	      <daml:Class rdf:about="Woman">
            </daml:intersectionOf>
	  </rdf:type>
	</foo>

this time because of the extra logical stuff attached to John.



How can this be fixed?  About the only way I can see is to not produce
RDF graph structure for the DAML+OIL logical stuff.  However, this is very
hard if we start with RDF triples, as how to we tell which triples are
logical and which are not?  

The situation is *much* better if we start with XML, as then we know where
we stand.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST