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

Re: revised version of semantics document

From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 03:02:30 +0200
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF9A41DB9A.B6E090CB-ONC1256C1F.00058963@agfa.be>

[...]

> > > Why should anyone care at all about the entailment rules?
> >
> > because
> >
> [...]
>
> OK, agreed, entailment can be related to *inference* rules.
>
> But why should I care whether ``no new existentials are introduced in 
the
> [inference] rules''?

OK, e.g. we can't have existentials in the conclusion that are
in the domain of an owl:InverseFunctionalProperty because that
property is simply not defined over it's whole range
(lists in the range of e.g. owl:intersectionOf could contain a
mix of resources being classes, properties, classes/properties
and so many of such intersections simply don't exist and in
general we can't give the list constraints in the premis)

-- ,
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Friday, 23 August 2002 21:03:08 GMT

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