W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > January 2003

Re: Test document: a few comments (one comment about AS & S)

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 04:37:49 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20030116.043749.111319260.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Cc: herman.ter.horst@philips.com, www-webont-wg@w3.org

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Subject: Re: Test document: a few comments (one comment about AS & S)
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 17:06:35 +0000

> 
> I take the relevant text to be:
> 
> [[
> <p>
> The top-level technical notion in this semantics for OWL is then
> whether an interpretation satisfies an OWL ontology, and the derived
> notion of entailment.
> An Abstract OWL interpretation, I, <em>satisfies</em> an OWL ontology,
> O, iff I satisfies each axiom and fact in the imports closure of O.
> An Abstract OWL ontology is <em>consistent</em> if there is some
> interpretation that satisfies it.
> An Abstract OWL ontology <em>entails</em> an OWL axiom or fact if each
> interpretation that satisfies the ontology also satisfies the axiom or
> fact.
> An Abstract OWL ontology <em>entails</em> another Abstract OWL ontology if each
> interpretation that satisfies the first ontology also satisfies the
> second ontology.
> Note that there is no need to create the imports closure of an
> ontology - any method that correctly determines the entailment relation is
> allowed.
> </p>

Yes.

> 
> ]]
> 
> Could you add an anchor on consistent and entails please.
> Also can I have the similar anchors in the OWL Full semantics.
> 
> Jeremy

The following now exist:

	direct.html#direct_consistent
	direct.html#direct_entails

	rdfs.html#rdfs_consistent_DL
	rdfs.html#rdfs_entails_DL
	rdfs.html#rdfs_consistent_Full
	rdfs.html#rdfs_entails_Full

peter
Received on Thursday, 16 January 2003 04:38:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:57 GMT