- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 13:58:33 +0000
- To: Pierre-Antoine Champin <swlists-040405@champin.net>
- Cc: Owl Dev <public-owl-dev@w3.org>, Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
On 4 Dec 2008, at 13:16, Pierre-Antoine Champin wrote: > Bijan Parsia wrote: >> I have no will power. >> >> I hate myself. > > :-D thanks anyway for digging faster than me in the document. > > As a matter of fact, I realized with Michael's and your mail that > what I > *really* wanted to write was: > > _:x rdf:type owl:NegativePropertyAssertion (1) > _:x owl:sourceIndividual _:x (2) > _:x owl:assertionProperty rdf:type (3) > _:x owl:targetIndividual owl:NegativePropertyAssertion (4) > > However, reading the section you kindly pointed to, it seems to me > that > there is no paradox either. > > Indeed, the belonging of I(_:x) to IEXT(owl:NegativePropertyAssertion) > seems to be *completely irrelevant* to the interpretation of triples > (2-4). So triple (1) says one thing, triples (2-4) say another > thing... > this is a plain old contradiction. > > Cool. :-) Nice. Props to Michael...the RDF semantics document doesn't make me want to kill myself like the RDF Semantics part of S&AS did. Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Thursday, 4 December 2008 13:55:34 UTC