- From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:13:08 +0100
- To: Chris Welty <cawelty@gmail.com>
- Cc: RIF <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Chris Welty wrote: > > I just want to point out a minor nit: > > Dave Reynolds wrote: >> The terms DS, ONDS, OS stand for "disjoint sorts", "overlapping-names >> disjoint sorts" (aka punning) and "overlapping sorts" as described in >> [1]. >> >> ** Base test case >> >> Ruleset: >> Forall ( p(a) :- And()) # p(a). >> Forall ( q(b) :- And()) # q(b). >> Forall ( p = q :- And()) # p = q. >> >> Query: p(?x) >> >> N.B. I'm assuming that the RIF Core atomic term "p = q" treats "p" and >> "q" as individuals. >> >> This is intended to be analogous to having "p" and "q" designate OWL >> classes, "a" and "b" be OWL individuals, "p(a)" be an rdf:type >> assertion and "=" be owl:sameAs. DS is OWL/DL, ONDS is OWL/DL-1.1, OS >> is OWL/full. > > OWL/Full is actually OSR in [1] (which is OS plus "reflection"). It > doesn't matter for any of your examples. Absolutely. I skated over this on the grounds that I don't think anyone is proposing OSR and, as you say, it doesn't affect the example. Dave -- Hewlett-Packard Limited Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN Registered No: 690597 England
Received on Thursday, 19 April 2007 09:11:58 UTC