- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2002 22:47:37 -0500
- To: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
- Cc: jonathan@openhealth.org, www-webont-wg@w3.org
From: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Subject: Re: Layering on what? was: Re: more on a same-syntax extension from RDF(S) to OWL
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 02:08:43 +0100
[...]
> we can surely look to the premis { _:L owl:item _:x } as an RDF graph
> where the bnodes of that graph (luckily) become universally quantified
> (reaching to conclusion scope) therefore we write ?L instead of _:L
> the premis statements are *not* asserted
> we can also look to { ?x a [ owl:oneOf ?L ] } as an RDF graph :c, where
> [ owl:oneOf ?L ] is like a Skolem functional term replacement of a bnode
> also the conclusion graph is *not* asserted
> :p log:implies :c is an RDF statement that *is* asserted
Yes, you can treat the N3 as an RDF graph, but getting it to mean what
you appear to want here is going to be a tough task. Even talking about it
informally is rather tortured.
peter
Received on Monday, 4 March 2002 22:47:55 UTC