- From: Swanson, Tim <tim.swanson@semanticarts.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 10:28:59 -0600
- To: <public-owl-dev@w3.org>
> > I think the following sentence is key: > > > > > This would require this (anonymous) concept to be satisfiable, > > > > So how do we require that a class be satisfiable? > I should probably re-state this to be more precise. As I understand it, if a class is satisfiable, that means that it CAN have members. That is, any class that is not unsatisfiable is satisfiable. What we are really talking about here is a class that DOES have members, even if we don't know what they are. I think this distinction is important somehow, but I'm still not exactly sure why. -- Tim
Received on Wednesday, 12 March 2008 16:29:19 UTC