RE: RDF and OWL rules

That's a very good point Geoff, we should not have "una"
(corrected in http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/owl-rules).

Thanks.

-- ,
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/


                                                                                                                       
                    "Geoff Chappell"                                                                                   
                    <geoff@sover.net>        To:     Jos De_Roo/AMDUS/MOR/Agfa-NV/BE/BAYER@AGFA                        
                    Sent by:                 cc:     "'RDF Rules'" <www-rdf-rules@w3.org>                              
                    www-rdf-rules-requ       Subject:     RE: RDF and OWL rules                                        
                    est@w3.org                                                                                         
                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                       
                    2003-04-01 03:04                                                                                   
                    PM                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                       





Hi Jos,

It looks to me like the rules for neg:item (rule40n2) in [1] make a
unique names assumption. Is this by design?

Should:
           ?a log:notEqualTo ?x
be changed to:
           ?a owl:differentFrom ?x

or am I misinterpreting the semantics of log:notEqualTo (i.e. does it do
more than a name comparison)?

Regards,

Geoff

[1] http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/owl-rules