From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>

Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2003 16:28:50 +0100

To: jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com

Cc: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo@agfa.com>, www-webont-wg@w3.org, www-webont-wg-request@w3.org

Message-ID: <OFF0969E52.921EA962-ONC1256CC0.005436B2-C1256CC0.00550C23@agfa.be>

Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2003 16:28:50 +0100

To: jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com

Cc: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo@agfa.com>, www-webont-wg@w3.org, www-webont-wg-request@w3.org

Message-ID: <OFF0969E52.921EA962-ONC1256CC0.005436B2-C1256CC0.00550C23@agfa.be>

[wasn't completely awake when I wrote earlier reply; hope I'm now] >> suppose you have a similar case >> the range of p is one of 1,2,3,4 >> the range of p is one of 3,4,5,6 >> i is in a restriction on property p >> with mincardinality of 2 >> >> is it then the case that >> i p 3 >> i p 4 > > >Yes that is correct. > >> >> I wouldn't think so as I (still) think >> that ranges can come in via RDF merges >> adding e.g. >> the range of p is one of 2,4,6,8 >> >> (I think I can't live with the idea of >> *closed* ranges...) >> > >The ranges aren't closed the related case ls: > >> the range of p is one of 1,2,3,4 >> the range of p is one of 3,4,5,6 >> the range of p is one of 2,4,6,8 >> i is in a restriction on property p >> with mincardinality of 2 > >This is inconsistent and thus it entails > >> i p 3 >> i p 4 > >(but it is less interesting this time round!). | that's a nice reasoning hmm... | so you would make it impossible to further make | the range of a property sharper (doing so would | make the kb inconsistent) | I believe that this is not following from AS&S | at least I can't conclude it from such piece as | if E is rdfs:range | then for x element of IOP, y element of IOC U IDC | <x,y> element of EXTi(Si(E)) iff | <w,z> element of EXTi(x) -> z element of CEXTi(y) | which we interpret as | {?x rdfs:range ?y. ?w ?x ?z} => {?z rdf:type ?y}. | {?z rdfs:subClassOf ?y. ?x rdfs:range ?z} => {?x rdfs:range ?y}. | | so I still think that we can't call the proposed testcase | http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/oneOf/Manifest004#test a | http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/testOntology#PositiveEntailmentTest given that the range of p is one of 1,2,3,4 the range of p is one of 3,4,5,6 the range of p is one of 2,4,6,8 then it is the case that (or we could entail that) the range of p is one of 1,2,3,4,10,20 the range of p is one of 3,4,5,6,10,20 the range of p is one of 2,4,6,8,10,20 (per {?z rdfs:subClassOf ?y. ?x rdfs:range ?z} => {?x rdfs:range ?y}. and having that one of 1,2,3,4 is a subclass of one of 1,2,3,4,10,20) which is consistent with i is in a restriction on property p with mincardinality of 2 but we can't in general derive the specific elements of EXTi(Si(p)) so I still think that we can't call the proposed testcase http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/oneOf/Manifest004#test a http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/testOntology#PositiveEntailmentTest -- , Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/Received on Saturday, 1 February 2003 10:29:34 UTC

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1
: Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:56:51 UTC
*