- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 15:44:29 -0400
- To: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
- cc: phayes@ai.uwf.edu, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
> >Perhaps I'm misreading it; if someone can present a
> >paradox using only log:forSome, log:forAll, and log:implies, then I
> >think I (and I'll venture TimBL and others) will be very interested.
>
> ####### rpf.n3
> @prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2001/10/daml+oil#> .
> @prefix : <rp#> .
>
> { ?x a :R } log:implies { ?x a [ owl:complementOf ?x ] } .
> { ?x a [ owl:complementOf ?x ] } log:implies { ?x a :R } .
Thanks, but I said "only". No fair bringing in some other
vocabulary with a negation construct.
-- sandro
Received on Monday, 29 April 2002 15:44:36 UTC