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

Re: examples entailment questions

From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 14:01:17 -0500
Message-Id: <p0600120bbb334899f674@[10.0.100.11]>
To: Christopher Welty <welty@us.ibm.com>
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
>GIVEN:
>
><owl:class rdf:ID="ManufacturedThing" />
><owl:class rdf:ID="NaturalThing" />
><owl:ObjectProperty rdf:ID="madeFrom">
>   <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#ManufacturedThing" />
>   <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#NaturalThing" />
></owl:ObjectProperty>
>
>
>DOES THIS:
>
><owl:Class rdf:ID="Wine">
>  <rdfs:subClassOf>
>   <owl:Restriction>
>    <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#madeFrom"/>
>    <owl:allValuesFrom rdf:resource="#Grape" />
>   </owl:Restriction>
>  </rdfs:subClassOf>
></owl:Class>
>
>
>ENTAIL THIS?:
>
><owl:class rdf:resource="#Wine">
>   <rdfs:subclass rdf:resource="#ManufacturedThing" />
></owl:class>
><owl:class rdf:resource="#Grape">
>   <rdfs:subclass rdfs:resource="#NaturalThing" />
></owl:class>

Entail in what sense? Obviously its OWL-entailed since we havnt 
changed the OWL semantics; and its not RDFS-entailed since it depends 
on the meaning of some OWL logical vocabulary.

I expect what you mean is, would it be OWL-entailed if OWL used the 
weaker RDFS conditions on rdfs:range , rdfs:domain and 
rdfs:subClassOf? That would depend on exactly how the weaker OWL 
semantics described the relationship between subClass and restriction 
class definitions, but the likeliest answer is that it would not be 
entailed.

>Certainly this holds in the interpretation.

That depends on how you interpret 'subClassOf'.  In RDFS, the class 
extension of A being a subset of that of B isn't a sufficient 
condition for A being an rdfs:subClassOf B.

Pat

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC	(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501			(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Thursday, 10 July 2003 15:01:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:01 GMT