"inverse" in owl-guide

[via the vacation program-3]

: Each of these sublanguages is an extension of its simpler predecessor, both
: in what can be legally expressed and in what can be validly concluded. The
: following set of relations hold. Their inverses do not.
:
: Every legal OWL Lite ontology is a legal OWL DL ontology.  ...

I believe you mean "converses".  The converse is
 
  Every legal OWL DL ontology is a legal OWL Lite ontology.

The inverse is

  Every legal OWL Lite ontology is not a legal OWL DL ontology.


OWL is an advanced logic.  Not good to have a basic error like this in the
documentation.  
A subset/superset relation might be more appropriate.

- Dave

-   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -
David E. Matthews, PhD            USDA-ARS Plant Genome Database Curator
Cornell University                Email: matthews@...
Department of Plant Breeding                          Phone: [phone]
409 Bradfield Hall                                      Fax: [phone]
Ithaca, New York 14853, USA                   GrainGenes: www.graingenes.org

[via the vacation program-3]

Something got removed from this message as I sent it.  The first line said
which webpage has the problem I'm complaining about.  The line was/is:

"http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/ says:"

Repeating,
w w w . w 3 . o r g / T R / o w l - g u i d e

- Dave

> From: Dave Matthews <matthews@...>
> Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:27:47 -0400 (EDT)
> To: public-webont-comments@...
>
>
> : Each of these sublanguages is an extension of its simpler predecessor, both
> : in what can be legally expressed and in what can be validly concluded. The
> : following set of relations hold. Their inverses do not.
> :
> : Every legal OWL Lite ontology is a legal OWL DL ontology.  ...
>
> I believe you mean "converses".  The converse is
>  
>   Every legal OWL DL ontology is a legal OWL Lite ontology.
>
> The inverse is
>
>   Every legal OWL Lite ontology is not a legal OWL DL ontology.
>
>
> OWL is an advanced logic.  Not good to have a basic error like this in the
> documentation.  
> A subset/superset relation might be more appropriate.
>
> - Dave

[Ivan Herman-2]

Dear Dave,

thanks for the comment.

W3C is working on possibly starting a new Web Ontology Working Group,
whose task will include an update of OWL. This has not been decided yet
at the moment of writing this mail, but there is a certain probability
that this will indeed happen and relatively soon. Your comment will
certainly be taken into account by that group.

Sincerely

Ivan

Dave Matthews wrote:

> Something got removed from this message as I sent it.  The first line said
> which webpage has the problem I'm complaining about.  The line was/is:
>
> "http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/ says:"
>
> Repeating,
> w w w . w 3 . o r g / T R / o w l - g u i d e
>
> - Dave
>
>
>> From: Dave Matthews <matthews@...>
>> Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:27:47 -0400 (EDT)
>> To: public-webont-comments@...
>>
>>
>> : Each of these sublanguages is an extension of its simpler predecessor, both
>> : in what can be legally expressed and in what can be validly concluded. The
>> : following set of relations hold. Their inverses do not.
>> :
>> : Every legal OWL Lite ontology is a legal OWL DL ontology.  ...
>>
>> I believe you mean "converses".  The converse is
>>  
>>   Every legal OWL DL ontology is a legal OWL Lite ontology.
>>
>> The inverse is
>>
>>   Every legal OWL Lite ontology is not a legal OWL DL ontology.
>>
>>
>> OWL is an advanced logic.  Not good to have a basic error like this in the
>> documentation.  
>> A subset/superset relation might be more appropriate.
>>
>> - Dave
>
>
>

--

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf