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

Re: Peter's example

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2002 12:29:49 -0500
To: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <20020105122949Q.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
From: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
Subject: Re: Peter's example
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 17:43:42 +0100

> > The reason I ask is that you have what appear to be constructors in the
> > right hand side of rule, and I was wondering what their meaning was.
> 
> well, this is what would be in Prolog clauses's left hand side
> (of course, that set of triples is constructed, but is
> in no sense asserted, just serving its purpose as hypothesis)


The question is what is the meaning of

{ :y :okw :x . :x owl:item :a } log:implies { ( :a / :y ) :okw :x } .

It appears that there is a constructor in the consequent of a rule.   

peter
Received on Saturday, 5 January 2002 12:31:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:47 GMT