W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > November 2000

Re: Logic and Using The Semantic Web Toolbox

From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 16:24:23 -0000
Message-ID: <025601c05a20$ec456cc0$62da93c3@z5n9x1>
To: "Seth Russell" <seth@robustai.net>
Cc: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>, <timbl@w3.org>
> > How do we use RDF/RDF Schema to automatically and mechanically assert
> > most basic of RDF Logic functions?
> Note that the Action Sequence bags can nest creating any possible program
> So if we put our attention on a triple like [A, isLeftOf, B] and assert
> do!, invert] our attention would end up on the triple [B, isRightOf, A]

How do we get processors to recognize methods like "invertProgram"? Is there
some way of getting from:-
[A, isLeftOf, B] to [B, isRightOf, A]
Or in other words, what is the RDF Schema way of saying [You, do!, invert]
so that when we invent this property, it automatically finds the reverse of
all of our triples? This is really great, because although:-

     <not>[A, isLeftOf, B]</not> != [B, is RightOf, A]

You could say:-
     if <not>[A, isLeftOf, B]</not> != [B, is RightOf, A]
     then [A, isLeftOf, B] = [B, is RightOf, A]
     and also [<not>A</not>, <not>isLeftOf</not>, <not>B</not>] = [B, is
RightOf, A]!

Which is exactly what I was looking for, and because the assertions are the
same that implies that there must *be* a way of implying "not" by simply
using rdfs...am I right?

> Don't you think if  [we, do!, it], we could get a little action?

You could write a novel in triples :-) I think it should definitely be done,
(actually I'd be suprised if it hasn't been done already).

Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
http://www.w3.org/WAI/ [ERT/GL/PF]
"Perhaps, but let's not get bogged down in semantics."
   - Homer J. Simpson, BABF07.
Received on Wednesday, 29 November 2000 11:24:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 2 March 2016 11:10:33 UTC