- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 15:20:00 +0200
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, <geoff@sover.net>
- Cc: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
Geoff: > > If I'm right to this point, the part I'm puzzling over is the test case > > at: > > > > http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/cardinality/Manifest005 > > > > which seems to me to be making a claim of class identity, not just > > equivalent class extensions, based upon the fact that a class (the > > restriction in the premise) has the same class extension as an > > intersection of two other classes/restrictions (in the conclusion). I'm > > probably interpreting it wrong, but I'm wondering what in the semantics > > licenses this particular entailment. Peter: > You are correct here. This should not be a conclusion. Added to my to-do list. I think we should change the current test to be a non-entailment and add a new test with an owl:equivalentClass link. Jeremy
Received on Tuesday, 8 April 2003 09:21:04 UTC