W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > March 2005

Reified Rule?

From: Jeremy Wong <jeremy@miko.hk>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 01:24:42 +0800
Message-ID: <000c01c53484$320fc970$0401a8c0@wongkjo9u38gzb>
To: <semantic-web@w3.org>
Consider the extensional entailment rule ext1..

_:ext1 rdf:first [ rdf:subject   _:uuu ;
                   rdf:predicate rdfs:domain ;
                   rdf:object    _:vvv .
                 ] ;
       rdf:rest  [ rdf:first [ rdf:subject   _:vvv ;
                               rdf:predicate rdfs:subClassOf ;
                               rdf:object    _:zzz .
                             ] ;
                   rdf:rest  rdf:nil .
                 ] ;
       _:imply   [ rdf:first [ rdf:subject   _:uuu ;
                               rdf:predicate rdfs:domain ;
                               rdf:object    _:zzz .
                             ] ;
                   rdf:rest  rdf:nil .
                 ] .

If we encounter the statement, e.g., ..

rdf:type rdfs:domain rdfs:Resource

Then a new rule is generated... (substitute _:uuu with rdf:type and _:vvv with rdfs:Resource, removing the first node of the list _:ext1)

_:rule1 rdf:first [ rdf:subject   rdfs:Resource ;
                    rdf:predicate rdfs:subClassOf ;
                    rdf:object    _:zzz .
                  ] ;
        rdf:rest  rdf:nil ;
        _:imply   [ rdf:first [ rdf:subject   rdf:type ;
                                rdf:predicate rdfs:domain ;
                                rdf:object    _:zzz .
                              ] ;
                    rdf:rest  rdf:nil .
                  ] .

Do we have any vocabulary the same meaning as the _:imply property above?
Received on Tuesday, 29 March 2005 17:25:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:41:45 UTC