W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-comments@w3.org > February 2010

Re: please keep Equality in the rule conclusion

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 22:38:42 +0000
Cc: <public-rif-comments@w3.org>
Message-Id: <D29BC035-A384-47C3-ACBA-6C4F96427E4F@deri.org>
To: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>
FWIW, (personal opinion...no group opinion) for doing owl:sameAs we don't need equality in rule-heads...
my guess is that for your use cases it is sufficient to axiomatise owl:sameAs, at least 
for pD*, ORL2RL that's all you need...

i.e. you can write the axiomatisation all in RIF without equality in ruleheads 
(not sure whether these rules are exactly what is in pD*, OWL2RL from the top of 
my head now... just to exemplify):

{S1 P O} :-  {S1 owl:sameAs S . S P O }
{S P1 O} :-  {P1 owl:sameAs P . S P O }
{S P O1} :-  {O1 owl:sameAs O . S P O }
{Y owl:sameAs X} :-  {X owl:sameAs Y.}
{Y owl:sameAs Z} :-  {X owl:sameAs Y . Y owl:sameAs Z}
{S owl:sameAs S} :-  { S P O }
{P owl:sameAs P} :-  { S P O }
{O owl:samaAs O} :-  { S P O }


HTH,
Axel

On 24 Feb 2010, at 22:13, Dan Connolly wrote:

> Use case: writing the pD* semantics of OWL in RIF.
> 
> http://www.ontotext.com/inference/rdfs_rules_owl.html#horst05
> 
> --
> Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
> gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
> 
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 24 February 2010 22:39:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 24 February 2010 22:39:17 GMT