- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 11:31:13 +0200
- To: jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com
- Cc: "<w3c-rdfcore-wg" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
> ACTION 2002-04-12#7, jjc: post message to rdfcore with motivating example > (for dark triples?) > > The basic problem can be expressed in DAML+OIL as: > > <rdf:Description rdf:about="#John"> > <rdf:type> > <daml:class> > <daml:intersectionOf rdf:parseType="daml:collection"> > <daml:class rdf:ID="Student"/> > <daml:class rdf:ID="Employee"/> > <daml:intersectionOf> > </daml:class> > </rdf:type> > </rdf:Description> > > entailing > > <rdf:Description rdf:about="#John"> > <rdf:type> > <daml:class> > <daml:intersectionOf rdf:parseType="daml:collection"> > <daml:class rdf:ID="Employee"/> > <daml:class rdf:ID="Student"/> > <daml:intersectionOf> > </daml:class> > </rdf:type> > </rdf:Description> > > ==== I've found DanC writing this in a nice testcase http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/intersectionOrderP.n3 entailing http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/intersectionOrderC.n3 and we've found it doing so (*) and it actually also does it when we *do* assert all triples of http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/intersectionOrderP.n3 (as tried to explain at the f2f meeting in Amsterdam) the only motivation for unasserted triples I've found so far was in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0087.html -- Jos De Roo (*) using http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/#R30016 we get @prefix ont: <http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil#>. @prefix ns: <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/owl-rules#>. @prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#>. @prefix : <http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/intersectionOrder#>. @prefix log: <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log#>. @prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>. @prefix io: <http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/intersectionOrder#>. @prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2001/10/daml+oil#>. @prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#>. { <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/owl-rules#rule9d> . { <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/owl-rules#rule9f> . :John a [ owl:intersectionOf ( :Student :Employee)]. { <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/owl-rules#rule10b> . { <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/owl-rules#rule10a> } log:implies {( :Employee) owl:item :Employee}} log:implies {( :Student :Employee) owl:item :Employee}} log:implies {:John a :Employee}. { <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/owl-rules#rule9c> . { <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/owl-rules#rule9f> . :John a [ owl:intersectionOf ( :Student :Employee)]. { <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/owl-rules#rule10a> } log:implies {( :Student :Employee) owl:item :Student}} log:implies {:John a :Student}} log:implies {:John a [ owl:intersectionOf ( :Student)]}} log:implies {:John a [ ont:intersectionOf ( :Employee :Student)]}. PS DanC, it's indeed a lot easier to do with a backward reasoner -- http://ilrt.org/discovery/chatlogs/rdfig/2002-04-15.html#T16-59-26
Received on Tuesday, 16 April 2002 05:32:55 UTC