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

Dave Reynold's message - bNodes as object in multiple triples

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 21:28:12 +0300
To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <200307232128.12660.jjc@hpl.hp.com>


Concerning blank nodes which represent descriptions and restrictions (i.e. the 
ones in the B.1 B.2) case, Dave has responded
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/2003Jul/0050

to Jim's 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/2003Jul/0044

by asking
**
If this proof is indeed in error an analysis demonstrating the error could 
supply the test case that we requested.
   [[
   A rationale for not permitting this in OWL DL
   should be given, preferably as a test case in OWL Full
   showing an OWL Full non-entailment that would hold in
   OWL DL if such triples were permitted.
   ]]
**

can anyone provide such a counterexample?
Peter, as the only one on record with doubts, can you provide a rationale for 
the current design?

Jeremy
Received on Wednesday, 23 July 2003 15:28:40 GMT

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