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

Re: Possible semantic bugs concerning domain and range

From: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 22:02:49 +0100
Message-ID: <15762.9337.607604.342500@merlin.horrocks.net>
To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org


Now we seem to have a come to a better understanding about the
correspondence between FOL and OWL, could you re-answer the following



>DAML+OIL, and I hope OWL, can be viewed a fragment of FOL, with atomic
>classes and properties corresponding to unary and binary predicates
>respectively. According to this correspondence, subClassOf axioms
>become implications, e.g., A subClassOf B corresponds to:
>forall x . A(x) -> B(x)
>Similarly, a property range axiom P range A corresponds to:
>forall x,y P(x,y) -> A(y).
>What could be simpler and clearer than that?
>The combination of these two sentences entails
>forall x,y P(x,y) -> B(y).
>What could be simpler and clearer than that?
>If you want some alternative semantics, could you please explain in
>similar terms what it is?
Received on Wednesday, 25 September 2002 16:05:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:56:47 UTC