Skip to main content

Extending the RDFS Entailment Lemma

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 3298))

Abstract

We complement the RDF semantics specification of the W3C by proving decidability of RDFS entailment. Furthermore, we show completeness and decidability of entailment for RDFS extended with datatypes and a property-related subset of OWL.

The RDF semantics specification provides a complete set of entailment rules for reasoning with RDFS, but does not prove decidability of RDFS entailment: the closure graphs used in the completeness proof are infinite for finite RDF graphs. We define partial closure graphs, which can be taken to be finite for finite RDF graphs, which can be computed in polynomial time, and which are sufficient to decide RDFS entailment.

We consider the extension of RDFS with datatypes and a property-related fragment of OWL: FunctionalProperty, InverseFunctionalProperty, sameAs, SymmetricProperty, TransitiveProperty, and inverseOf. In order to obtain a complete set of simple entailment rules, the semantics that we use for these extensions is in line with the ‘if-semantics’ of RDFS, and weaker than the ‘iff-semantics’ defining D-entailment and OWL (DL or Full) entailment. Classes can be used as instances, the use of FunctionalProperty and TransitiveProperty is not restricted to obtain decidability, and a partial closure that is sufficient for deciding entailment can be computed in polynomial time.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Grant, J., Beckett, D. (eds.): RDF Test Cases, W3C Recommendation, February 10 (2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-testcases-20040210/

  2. Hayes, P. (ed.): RDF Semantics, W3C Recommendation, February 10 (2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-mt-20040210/

  3. Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F.: Reducing OWL Entailment to Description Logic Satisfiability. In: Fensel, D., Sycara, K., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.) ISWC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2870, pp. 17–29. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Klyne, G., Carroll, J. (eds.): Resource Description Framework (RDF): Concepts and Abstract Syntax, W3C Recommendation, February 10 (2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/

  5. Patel-Schneider, P.F., Hayes, P., Horrocks, I. (eds.): OWL Web Ontology Language Semantics and Abstract Syntax, W3C Recommendation, February 10 (2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-semantics-20040210/

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

ter Horst, H.J. (2004). Extending the RDFS Entailment Lemma. In: McIlraith, S.A., Plexousakis, D., van Harmelen, F. (eds) The Semantic Web – ISWC 2004. ISWC 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3298. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30475-3_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30475-3_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-23798-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-30475-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics