- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 16:47:30 +0200
- To: "Sean Bechhofer <seanb" <seanb@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Sean Bechhofer wrote: > On Fri, 22 Aug 2003, Jos De_Roo wrote: > > > Sean - can you explain why > > oiled:V16448 rdf:type oiled:C122. > > in description-logic/Manifest208 ? > > Quick answer: because the reasoner says so! :-))). Seriously, though, this > is one of those tests that probably goes past the point where one (or at > least where *I*) can understand it without machine help. I'll take a > look if I get a chance, but I'm not hopeful. I understand; for instance for description-logic/Manifest206 it took me 6 hours with paper and pencil to figure out why some triple (forgot which one) was the case :-( > This was one of the tests that has been translated from an original > collection that were run against a number of provers, so I'd be > *reasonably* confident that the test premises/conclusions are right. > Having said that, I note that our FO based implementation has failed to > find a proof, so it is probably worth further investigation before > approving this one.... Well maybe striking oiled:V16448 rdf:type oiled:C122. from the conclusion works?? -- Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Tuesday, 26 August 2003 10:47:40 UTC