W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-rules@w3.org > December 2003

RE: NAF and owl:complementOf semantics?

From: Wagner, G.R. <G.R.Wagner@tm.tue.nl>
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 20:27:16 +0100
Message-ID: <D0D13B0440FC1F4995BC4CD7F84A3A4216494D@tmex2.campus.tue.nl>
To: <minsu@etri.re.kr>, <www-rdf-rules@w3.org>

> According to the S&AS, owl:complementOf(c) is interpreted
> as O - EC(c), which is, as I understand, a set of individuals
> which are not contained in the set of individuals of type c.
> For me, this was easily taken as a semantic which can be
> implemented simply by negation-as-failure. I could formulate
> the semantic into a rule as follows:
> if
>    owl:complementOf(?c1,?c2) and owl:Thing(?x) and not ?c2(?x)
> then
>    ?c1(?x);
> Is this a proper axiomatization of owl:complementOf?

No, because it depends on whether you have a complete
representation of "EC(?c2)" in the scope of your KB.
To get this, you would need to make an explicit completeness
assumption (also called "local closed-world assumption", see
previous messages in this list) for the class denoted by ?c2.

Gerd Wagner
Received on Tuesday, 9 December 2003 14:30:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 2 March 2016 11:10:15 UTC