W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > November 2007

Re: ISSUE-3: REPORTED: Lack of anonymous individuals

From: Carsten Lutz <clu@tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de>
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 15:20:55 +0100 (CET)
To: gstoil@image.ece.ntua.gr
Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
Message-id: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711081518530.20348@frege.inf.tu-dresden.de>

On Thu, 8 Nov 2007, gstoil@image.ece.ntua.gr wrote:
>> But *do* allow it in existential and universal restrictions.
> Sorry but I don't see where the definition differentiates between
> SROIQ-QCR-concepts and SROIQ-valua/existential-concepts.
> For example, I don't see how the current algorithm could classify
> {a:\not \exists uprop.Self} as inconsistent.

I would have to look into the algorithm. Maybe Uli can comment on this.
On the other hand, I don't care too much about this point. We are not
formalizing this algorithm, we are designing OWL 1.1. And whether or not
it is in that particular algorithm, I keep up my claim that it is 
technically not difficult. We should rather discuss whether we think
it is useful enough to be included. I do.


*      Carsten Lutz, Institut f"ur Theoretische Informatik, TU Dresden       *
*     Office phone:++49 351 46339171   mailto:lutz@tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de     *
Received on Thursday, 8 November 2007 14:21:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:00 UTC