Search Mailing List Archives


Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Reverse Sort
Limit to: All This Week Last Week This Month Last Month
Select Date Range     through    

[protege-owl] Phantom class

Thomas Russ tar at ISI.EDU
Fri Oct 3 13:11:11 PDT 2008


On Oct 3, 2008, at 1:30 AM, Dmitry Repchevsky wrote:

>> It is valid as an owl full ontology but not as owl 1.0 nor owl 2.0.
> If I understand you correctly owl 1.0-dl forbids using a same name  
> for a
> class and a property???

Yes, at least for OWL-DL:

OWL DL requires type separation (a class can not also be an individual  
or property, a property can not also be an individual or class). This  
implies that restrictions cannot be applied to the language elements  
of OWL itself (something that is allowed in OWL Full). Furthermore,  
OWL DL requires that properties are either ObjectProperties or  
DatatypeProperties.

Source: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s4





More information about the protege-owl mailing list