[...] > I think what concerns me most, in this context, is the appropriate > explanation of why this is the choice to make, versus the most > obvious choice we have at our disposal (i.e., skolemization). > That is, what are the pro's and con's that favour the existential > approach vs the skolem one? well, bNodes are quite all-round I think - in an graph with asserted facts they are existentials which could be written as skolem constants, indeed - in a query (graph) they are universals - in the LHS (graph) of an entailment they are universals - in owl lists the are functional terms i.e. (a b) denotes the same thing wether it's written in one graph, or written in another graph - in the RHS (graph) of an entailment they are skolem functions which could be written as daml lists (I think) -- Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/Received on Monday, 25 March 2002 14:44:11 EST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:46:22 EDT