W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-dev@w3.org > January to March 2008

RE: some x has only y

From: Swanson, Tim <tim.swanson@semanticarts.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 10:28:59 -0600
Message-ID: <51F1B258494D5A4488C95F40E55F35D53E6C0F@exchsrvr.semanticarts.local>
To: <public-owl-dev@w3.org>
> I think the following sentence is key:
> >
> > This would require this (anonymous) concept to be satisfiable,
> >
> So how do we require that a class be satisfiable? 

I should probably re-state this to be more precise. As I understand it, if a class is satisfiable, that means that it CAN have members. That is, any class that is not unsatisfiable is satisfiable.

What we are really talking about here is a class that DOES have members, even if we don't know what they are. I think this distinction is important somehow, but I'm still not exactly sure why.

-- Tim

Received on Wednesday, 12 March 2008 16:29:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:58:16 UTC