From: David Martin (martin@ai.sri.com)
Date: 11/11/03
Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > From: David Martin <martin@ai.sri.com> > Subject: easy question about Rules proposal > Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:03:36 -0800 > > >>Folks (esp. Ian and Peter) - >> >>I have a question about the Ian/Peter Rules Language proposal, which is >>minor but important in the sense that I want to get some examples right >>in something I'm writing. >> >>Why in the following example (and I think all the examples in >> http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~horrocks/DAML/Rules/) >>is "owlx:name" used, both at point of definition and point of reference, >>instead of using rdf:ID and rdf:resource? > > > Because this is not RDF/XML, but is instead an extension of the OWL XML > presentation syntax (for a pointer see the proposal itself), and conforms > to that syntax. I note that the OWL XML presentation syntax uses owlx as a > namespace reference; there is no commitment (yet) as to whether the OWL > rules should share namespaces with the OWL XML presentation syntax. Thanks. I guess if I'd looked more carefully, I would have seen that things were done differently in the RDF/XML versions of your examples. - David > > peter > > > >><owlx:Rule> >> <owlx:antecedent> >> <owlx:individualPropertyAtom owlx:property="hasParent"> >> <owlx:Variable owlx:name="x1" /> >> <owlx:Variable owlx:name="x2" /> >> </owlx:individualPropertyAtom> >> <owlx:individualPropertyAtom owlx:property="hasBrother"> >> <owlx:Variable owlx:name="x2" /> >> <owlx:Variable owlx:name="x3" /> >> </owlx:individualPropertyAtom> >> </owlx:antecedent> >> <owlx:consequent> >> <owlx:individualPropertyAtom owlx:property="hasUncle"> >> <owlx:Variable owlx:name="x1" /> >> <owlx:Variable owlx:name="x3" /> >> </owlx:individualPropertyAtom> >> </owlx:consequent> >></owlx:Rule> >> >>Thanks, >>David
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 11/11/03 EST