Re: OWL semantics

[...]

> the zeitgeist of RDF. After all, if an RDF reasoner is supposed to
> conclude A subClassOf C, when it sees A foo B, B foo C, and foo
> subpropertyOf subClassOf, why shouldn't an OWL reasoner? [1]

yes, why not

[...]

> [1] I suspect that most RDF tools do not handle this inference correctly
> anyway, but that is a different issue

right, that is a different issue
we get (using owl-rules importing rdfs-rules)

 {
  <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/rdfs-rules#rule8> .
   {
    <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/rdfs-rules#rule6a> .
    :B :foo :C} log:implies
  {:B rdfs:subClassOf :C}.
   {
    <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/rdfs-rules#rule6a> .
    :A :foo :B} log:implies
  {:A rdfs:subClassOf :B}} log:implies
{:A rdfs:subClassOf :C}.

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