- From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
- Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 12:07:59 -0400
- To: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: public-rif-wg@w3.org
You are missing the point completely and instead are getting back to this non-sequitur. It does not matter whether it is ## or # or none at all are in BLD. We are talking about extensions of dialects. One might want this extension with respect to rdf:type, for example. In fact, anybody who would want to contemplate a true object-oriented extension of the RIF+RDF combo would want such an inference. --michael > Michael Kifer wrote: > > > In BLD, if we have a##b and b[foo->bar] then it does not follow that > > a[foo->bar]. But a true object-oriented extension (a la F-logic, for example) > > would add nonmon inheritance and a[foo->bar] would follow. > > The possibility that such an extension might be wanted is another good > argument why ## should not be in BLD. Such an interpretation of ## would > be in conflict with other interpretations such as RDFS/OWL and should > use a different predicate. > > Dave > -- > Hewlett-Packard Limited > Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN > Registered No: 690597 England >
Received on Monday, 22 October 2007 16:13:45 UTC