Re: ISSUE-83 (Vipul): Property Chain Axiom: P1 o P2 => P2 o P1 (really ISSUE-64)?

On Dec 3, 2007, at 9:04 AM, Ian Horrocks wrote:

> To summarise: This is not allowed in the existing syntax, it would  
> lead to undecidability if it were allowed, and it is not supported  
> by implementations. I therefore propose to postpone it on these  
> grounds.

Just to be clear...I could be perhaps persuaded to support such a  
feature if a clear implementation story were available to me and  
several people could point to use cases.

That is, I'm personally more concerned with implementability (given  
exisiting tools) than strict implementation. (Obviously, if something  
is highly implementable, it shouldn't be hard to quickly implement  
it. So, again, I think the strategy of lobbying for implementation  
feedback is a good one.)


Received on Monday, 3 December 2007 09:33:51 UTC