- From: Rinke Hoekstra <hoekstra@uva.nl>
- Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:09:23 +0100
- To: OWL 2 <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Hi, It seems to me that rules cax-eqc1 and cax-eqc2 in Table 7 are superfluous given the cax-sco rule in the same table, and scm-eqc in Table 9. See the rules below. -Rinke scm-eqc IF T(?c1, owl:equivalentClass, ?c2) THEN T(?c1, rdfs:subClassOf, ?c2) T(?c2, rdfs:subClassOf, ?c1) cax-sco IF T(?c1, rdfs:subClassOf, ?c2) T(?x, rdf:type, ?c1) THEN T(?x, rdf:type, ?c2) cax-eqc1 IF T(?c1, owl:equivalentClass, ?c2) T(?x, rdf:type, ?c1) THEN T(?x, rdf:type, ?c2) cax-eqc2 IF T(?c1, owl:equivalentClass, ?c2) T(?x, rdf:type, ?c2) THEN T(?x, rdf:type, ?c1) ----------------------------------------------- Drs. Rinke Hoekstra Email: hoekstra@uva.nl Skype: rinkehoekstra Phone: +31-20-5253499 Fax: +31-20-5253495 Web: http://www.leibnizcenter.org/users/rinke Leibniz Center for Law, Faculty of Law University of Amsterdam, PO Box 1030 1000 BA Amsterdam, The Netherlands -----------------------------------------------
Received on Friday, 21 November 2008 14:09:58 UTC