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

On March 22, Jeremy Carroll writes:
> > 
> > [1] 
> http://www-lti.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/~clu/papers/archive/lutzdiss.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> Ian,
> 
> I don't think I have time to read 225 pages ... :(
> 
> Is there a shorter version of the central argument?

The key point is that without separation of properties, when you
negate restriction classes, e.g., (hasClass age >=21) you get (toClass
age (union <21 Thing)), which breaks the separation of the datatype
and abstract domains which is itself required in order to allow
datatype reasoning to be separated from class based reasoning.

Ian


> 
> Jeremy
>