W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rule-workshop-discuss@w3.org > August 2005

Re: FOL versus Rule Languages - A tutorial

From: <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 10:58:45 +0200
To: dieter.fensel@deri.org
Cc: Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr>, public-rule-workshop-discuss@w3.org, public-rule-workshop-discuss-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF6C5736B8.B7C310F4-ONC1257069.0030CB7A-C1257069.00314B6C@agfa.com>

very helpful Dieter; thanks
[...]
>                "Assume you have
>
>                p(a,b), p(b,c)
>                and the following two rules:
>                p(x,y) -> q(x,y)
>                p(x,y) & p(y,z) -> q(x,z)
>
>                Then under minimal model semantics q is the deductive 
closure
>                of p, i.e., q(a,b), q(b,c), q(a,c) are true and no other 
q(x,y) us true.
>                In FOL, this is different since you cannot exclude models 
in which
>                q(a,a) is true. That is, you cannot express deductive 
closure in FOL." [1]

what if (somewhere on the web) it is also the case that
a owl:sameAs b
(it was first order notation with equality)

-- 
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Friday, 26 August 2005 08:59:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:16:23 GMT