- From: Natasha Noy <noy@SMI.Stanford.EDU>
- Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 15:11:48 -0700
- To: Christopher Welty <welty@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: rector@cs.man.ac.uk, ewallace@cme.nist.gov, public-swbp-wg@w3.org
> Well, OKBC was intended to be an API, in my understanding, so it may
> very well have capabilities that are beyond FOL, as OO languages do.
but there is an axiomatization for it in FOL in the specs, AFAIK
>
> Regarding the axiomatization, why don't you try writing FOL axioms
> that capture this. I don't understand how what you have said can be
> written in FOL.
(=> (direct-type ?C ?x)
(not (exists ?Y (and (subclass-of ?Y ?C) (instance-of ?X ?Y))))
(modulo the correct order of arguments for the predicates)
> Then, much more to the point, try it in OWL.
Ah, that's a whole other story :) But you were generalizing to FOL.
Natasha
Received on Friday, 22 October 2004 22:12:12 UTC