W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > May 2001

Re: What do the ontologists want

From: Drew McDermott <drew.mcdermott@yale.edu>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 15:36:09 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200105181936.PAA17004@pantheon-po03.its.yale.edu>
To: www-rdf-logic@w3.org

   [seth russell]
   Incidentally, I'm still trying to wrap my pee brain around the idea that
   there is a problem with 'not' here.   To me {B subClass A.  C subClass A.  B
   not C.} is a perfectly valid thing to say and nicely implies {B xor C}.
   Does it not ?

I don't understand the example.  Is this three triples?  If so, what
does B not C mean?  Are A, B, and C themselves supposed to be triples
or reified triples?  If not, how do you negate a triple?

                                             -- Drew McDermott
Received on Friday, 18 May 2001 15:36:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 2 March 2016 11:10:35 UTC