RE: Proposal and Test cases (Re: skolems: visible differences?)

Bijan Parsia answered to Jeremy Carroll:

>You mean Michael's? I thought it was based on his misunderstanding of  
>how bnodes work.

To be precise: It was a misunderstanding of how /skolems/ work.

>Basically, he thought they worked the way "_" does in prolog, when in  
>fact they work like "_SomeIdentifier", with the scope being graphs  
>rather than clauses.
>
>And I agree that if sameAs(_:y, _:y) were not necessarily true that  
>the user who is me would certainly be confuse :)

This example ontology shows my misunderstanding:

  DifferentIndividuals(_:y _:y)

Under existential bNode semantics, this ontology is *inconsistent*.

If skolems would work the way I /thought/ ("a fresh variable for each
occurrence"), than this ontology would be *consistent*, since the two
occurrences of '_:y' would then be allowed to be interpreted differently. 

Since it is known that skolems and existentials behave equivalently wrt
consistency of an ontology, this cannot be, hence I must be wrong.

Thanks, Bijan and Jeremy!

Cheers,
Michael

--
Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider
FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik Karlsruhe
Abtl. Information Process Engineering (IPE)
Tel  : +49-721-9654-726
Fax  : +49-721-9654-727
Email: Michael.Schneider@fzi.de
Web  : http://www.fzi.de/ipe/eng/mitarbeiter.php?id=555

FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe
Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe
Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959
Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
Az: 14-0563.1 Regierungspräsidium Karlsruhe
Vorstand: Rüdiger Dillmann, Michael Flor, Jivka Ovtcharova, Rudi Studer
Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus