W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > August 2002

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

From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 15:04:15 -0400
Message-ID: <007001c24945$8eaa6d20$6401a8c0@attbi.com>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: <www-webont-wg@w3.org>

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
Received on Wednesday, 21 August 2002 15:02:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:51 GMT