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

Re: TEST: description-logic testcases

From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 02:37:14 +0200
To: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org, www-webont-wg-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFDCC4273F.653A34DE-ONC1256D21.00030A4D-C1256D21.000369D5@agfa.be>


oops... that rewrite should have been the horn
~(a nand b) or ~(b nand c) or ~(c nand a) or false

-- ,
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/


                                                                                                                                 
                    Jos                                                                                                          
                    De_Roo/AMDUS/MOR/Agfa-NV/BE/       To:     www-webont-wg@w3.org                                              
                    BAYER@AGFA                         cc:                                                                       
                    Sent by:                           Subject:     TEST: description-logic testcases                            
                    www-webont-wg-request@w3.org                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                 
                    2003-05-09 02:06 AM                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                 





This is maybe a (railway) sleeper;
is about (re)writing those dl testcases in
simple triples and triple implications.

Let's take case 001

<!--
DL Test: fact1.1
If a, b and c are disjoint, then:
(a and b) or (b and
c) or (c and a)
is unsatisfiable.
-->

and simply write that down as

:a owl:disjointWith :b.
:a owl:disjointWith :c.
:b owl:disjointWith :c.
{:a owl:disjointWith :b. :b owl:disjointWith :c. :c owl:disjointWith :a} =>
{: a :Inconsistency}.

where the rewrite of (a and b) or (b and c) or (c and a)
is the cnf ~(a or b) or ~(b or c) or ~(c or a) or false

and then the inconsistency is easily proved as
: a :Inconsistency.

-- ,
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Thursday, 8 May 2003 20:37:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:00 GMT