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

Re: ISSUE 5.3 Semantic Layering

From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 00:27:18 +0200
To: "Jeremy Carroll <jjc" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF9E1C596F.8FD50118-ONC1256D55.007A11B5-C1256D55.007B5AD9@agfa.be>


>> OK, in OWL ***Full*** it should be
>> {u in RI | <u, y> in EXTI(p) }
>> and let's do that explicitly for
>> all such instead of simply saying
>>
>> IOT = RI
>> IOC = CEXTI(SI(rdfs:Class))
>> IOP = CEXTI(SI(rdf:Property))
>>
>
>
>Isn't that the position that we reduce the
>
>OWL-DL-entails iff OWL-Full-entails
>
>to
>
>If OWL-DL-entails then OWL-Full-entails
>
>or maybe not?
>
>(It's either that one, or it's nonmon)

At least your 2 counterexamples are resolved
that way and I don't see issues with current
test cases and I haven't seen an example of
your noniff or nonmon :->


--
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Monday, 30 June 2003 18:27:28 GMT

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