W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-cwm-talk@w3.org > January to March 2004

Re: owl inconsistencies

From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:07:28 +0100
To: "naudts guido <naudts_vannoten" <naudts_vannoten@yahoo.com>
Cc: cwm <public-cwm-talk@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OFCDF88656.FDA34AC5-ONC1256E5E.0047183A-C1256E5E.0047F0DA@agfa.com>


[...]

> Take the triples:
> (1)
> :x owl:oneOf (:a :b :c).
> :d a :x.
> This is a clear inconsistency and should be detected
> of course.

there is no "unique names assumption",
and it could be the case that
:d owl:sameAs :b.

a premise that we actually consider inconsistent is
?C owl:oneOf ?L. ?X a ?C. ?L :notItem ?X.

with
rdf:nil :notItem ?X.
{?S rdf:first ?A. ?A owl:differentFrom ?X. ?S rdf:rest ?B. ?B :notItem ?X}
=> {?S :notItem ?X}.

--
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Sunday, 21 March 2004 08:08:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:01 GMT