Re: move oneOf - should issue be opened? (was Re: Proposed response to Martin Merry, HP)

Jos De_Roo wrote:

>> - JH
>>p.s. I am also assuming when we say "oneOf" we also include
>>"hasValue" - is that correct?
>>
> 
> well in a sense I don't see the relation...
> 



<#p> owl:inverseOf <#invP> .
<#domainP> owl:equivalentClass _:r .
_:r owl:onProperty <#p> .
_:r owl:hasValue <#a> .
<#oneOfA> owl:equivalentClass _:r2 .
_:r2 owl:onProperty <#invP> .
_:r2 owl:someValuesFrom <#domainP> .

entails

<#oneOfA> owl:oneOf [<#a>] .


owl:oneOf with non singleton RHS can be derived using unionOf.


Jeremy