Re: minor typos in Test doc

[Sean's explanation of
http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/description-logic/inconsistent107.rdf]

> The role hierarchy is a bit of a red herring here, as is the definition
> of a.

I never clearly understood what "red herring" meant; now I got it ;-)

> The definition of Unsatisfiable says that anything that's an instance of
> Unsatisfiable has to have at least 1 r, has to be related to a c via r
and
> has to be related to a d via r. It must also be related to no more than
> one thing via r (the complement of [minCard 2 r] is [maxCard 1 r]). But
> this leads to a contradiction as c and d are disjoint.

OK - my understanding of owl:someValuesFrom was wrong
I thought that the intersectionOf
  restriction(a:r someValuesFrom a:d)
  restriction(a:r someValuesFrom a:c)
wasn't that strongly constrained ie that it has
some members related to a c via r and some other
members related to a d via r but I guess that's
what you call a unionOf isn't it?


> Does that help?

Quite a lot, thanks Sean.


--
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/