- From: Giorgos Stoilos <gstoil@image.ece.ntua.gr>
- Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 12:21:57 +0200
- To: "'Carsten Lutz'" <clu@tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de>
- Cc: <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: public-owl-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-owl-wg-request@w3.org] > On Behalf Of Carsten Lutz > Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 7:21 PM > To: gstoil@image.ece.ntua.gr > Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org > Subject: Re: ISSUE-3: REPORTED: Lack of anonymous individuals > > > On Thu, 8 Nov 2007, gstoil@image.ece.ntua.gr wrote: > > > > Hmmm. Interesting, but as it says this is a simulation of the universal > > role. And apparently a reflexive, symmetric and transitive super-role > does > > not give you a total relation (as you said in your original mail). Does > this > > have any impact on your technique on representing anonymous individuals? > > No. The representation I mentioned only relies on having the universal > role available in existential and universal quantifiers. SROIQ has this. > On top of this, all that matters is that the algorithm is correct, but > not what precisely it does internally. > Right. If we are talking about the super-role (reflexive, transitive, symmetric and super-role of every role) and not the top or totally ordered role, then I believe everything is fine. After all, this role was used in internalization for quite sometime. Greetings, -gstoil > greetings, > Carsten > > -- > * Carsten Lutz, Institut f"ur Theoretische Informatik, TU Dresden > * > * Office phone:++49 351 46339171 mailto:lutz@tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de > *
Received on Friday, 9 November 2007 10:22:27 UTC