Re: SEM: semantics for current proposal (why R disjoint V?)

On Thu, 2002-03-21 at 06:55, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
[...]
> 3. Interpretations
> 
> An OWL interpretation, I, over a datatyping scheme DT consists of 
> 	R, nonempty, disjoint from V	the domain of resources 

As noted in the design discussions for DAML+OIL, I don't
see sufficient justification for making V disjoint
from R.

It seems silly not to be able to talk about the intersection
of two sets of strings, or UniqueProperty's whose
range is dates, or whatever.


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/