Re: yet another non-entailment (was Re: another revision of semantics document)

Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:

>
> I don't see how they are fixable.
>

Related question then would:

John rdf:type owl:Thing .

foo owl:sameClassAs _:x
_:x owl:oneOf _:l .
_:l owl:first John .
_:l owl:rest owl:nil .

entail

John rdf:type foo .

?

If not, that would (obviously) be a showstopper nonentailment. Otherwise are
you saying that we are back to the solipsistic model?

Jonathan