- From: Carsten Lutz <clu@tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 15:45:17 +0100 (CET)
- To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Cc: Uli Sattler <sattler@cs.man.ac.uk>, "Web Ontology Language ((OWL)) Working Group WG" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Bijan Parsia wrote: > > So, would a concrete proposal that we'd introduce a "owl:RoleThing" that is > the superrole of all other roles? What does "the superrole" mean? The smallest superrole? That would give you transitive closure in the case you have only a single other role. Or an arbitrary superrole? That's also not the semantics of the universal role and it would break a lot of uses of the universal role. The semantics should be: the crossproduct of the whole domain. > If so, for symmetry we should introduce the > owl:RoleNothing (ok, better names, please!) (which would be easily definable > by disjointness with owl:RoleThing). Fine with me. greetings, Carsten -- * Carsten Lutz, Institut f"ur Theoretische Informatik, TU Dresden * * Office phone:++49 351 46339171 mailto:lutz@tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de *
Received on Friday, 18 January 2008 14:46:01 UTC