- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 19:07:18 -0500
- To: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
- Cc: las@olin.edu, phayes@ai.uwf.edu, jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com, Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl, horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk, mdean@bbn.com, lynn.stein@olin.edu, www-webont-wg@w3.org, www-archive@w3.org, hendler@cs.umd.edu, connolly@w3.org
From: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com Subject: Re: UPDATE: initial message concerning syntax Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 01:00:33 +0100 > > > One place to see the problem is in KIF. The KIF definition > > http://logic.stanford.edu/kif/dpans.html > > gives an example where a truth predicate can cause problems. > > I see > > > In the DAML+OIL area, if you require the presence of all syntax-like > > constructs in the semantics you can easily end up with structures like > > > > :_x complementOf :_x . > > > > in all interpretations. Now consider whether :_x is an instance of :_x. > > I think that complementOf is an irreflexive property > How could we express that in SWOL? > > -- > Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/ SWOL has no such construct. Even if it did, you could construct a three-element loop which has the same problem. There are also lots of other constructs that cause similar problems. peter
Received on Thursday, 20 December 2001 19:08:48 UTC