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

Re: SEM: discussions concerning model theory (Re: ADMIN: draft ftf meeting record)

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 17:28:05 -0400
To: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <20020716172805R.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>

From: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Subject: Re: SEM: discussions concerning model theory (Re: ADMIN: draft ftf  meeting record)
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 23:06:53 +0200

> We now have it that
> 
>   :H owl:oneOf ( :small :medium :tall ) .
>   :K owl:oneOf ( :tall :medium :small ) .
>   :G owl:oneOf ( :medium :small ) .
>   :large rdf:type :H .
> 
> owl-entails
> 
>   :small rdf:type :H .
>   :K owl:sameClassAs :H .

OK, I think that these two follow in all the proposals.

>   :G rdfs:subClassOf :K .

This does not follow in Dan Connolly's proposal.

>   :large eg:inconsistentWith owl:oneOf .

This doesn't follow in any proposal, as eg:inconsistentWith is not defined
in any of the proposals.  In any case, what is the intended meaning of
eg:inconsistentWith here?


> So I thought (and tried sucessfully out with
> http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/owl-rules)
> why not having that
> 
>   :p owl:extension ( ( :s1 :o1 ) ( :s2 :o2 ) ) .
>   :q owl:extension ( ( :s2 :o2 ) ( :s1 :o1 ) ) .
>   :r owl:extension ( ( :s1 :o1 ) ) .
>   :s3 :p :o3 .
> 
> owl-entails
>  
>   :s1 :p :o1 .
>   :q owl:samePropertyAs :p .
>   :r rdfs:subPropertyOf :q .
>   ( :s3 :o3 ) eg:inconsistentWith owl:extension .

Well owl:extension is not in any of the proposals so how can this follow?

> as ako explicitly stating the definitive extension
> of a property and check it's consistencies as well
> (just like for classes)

peter
Received on Tuesday, 16 July 2002 17:28:16 GMT

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