- From: Drew McDermott <drew.mcdermott@yale.edu>
- Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 15:40:44 -0400 (EDT)
- To: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
[me] >Well, our disagreement is clear, but, at least in part, easily >settled. In our view, 'imports' *is* magic syntax, and not a property >of anything. [Pat Hayes] I agree, that is the only sensible way to look at it. If/when we get around to putting something like this into the CL standard it will definitely be a special syntax, not a normal logical assertion. If it were an assertion it would have to be in a special meta-level concerned with ontologies as entities, and I don't think anyone wants to get involved with that. In case anyone needs further arguments in favor of this position, consider this one: If 'imports' is a property, then I can make statements like: "There exists an ontology that this one imports." "Ont-1 imports every elements of {Ont-A, Ont-B, Ont-C} that Ont-2 does not import." "Ont-1 imports every ontology that doesn't import itself." These are pernicious but unavoidable as far as I can see. -- Drew McDermott
Received on Tuesday, 30 April 2002 15:40:55 UTC