ISSUE 5.3, a non-mon example

Thanks to Martin Merry for this one.

Going with the current S&AS wording, we might read it as saying that:
- given an RDF document 
- we examine it syntactically
- if it is in OWL DL then we apply the direct semantics
- otherwise we apply the OWL Full semantics

(Martin was actually working from the consensus resolution of 5.3)

Document A:
eg:a rdfs:subClassOf eg:b .

Document B: 
_:b rdf:type owl:Thing .

Document A*
eg:a rdfs:subClassOf eg:b .
eg:a rdf:type owl:Class .
eg:b rdf:type owl:Class.

Document A**
eg:a rdfs:subClassOf eg:b .
eg:a rdf:type owl:Class .
eg:b rdf:type owl:Class.
owl:Thing owl:equivalentClass owl:Nothing .

A is not in OWL DL,
therefore A entails B
(since in OWL Full, owl:Thing and rdfs:Resource are equivalent and not empty)

A* is in OWL DL, but is a monotonic extension of A.

A* does not entail B (since A** is consistent)

Jeremy