Search Mailing List Archives
[protege-owl] Phantom class
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
More information about the protege-owl