- From: Geoff Chappell <geoff@sover.net>
- Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 13:36:23 -0500
- To: "'Enrico Franconi'" <franconi@inf.unibz.it>, <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: www-rdf-logic-request@w3.org [mailto:www-rdf-logic-request@w3.org] > On Behalf Of Enrico Franconi > Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 10:51 AM > To: Geoff Chappell; www-rdf-logic@w3.org > Subject: Re: intersectionOf and subClassOf > > > On 30/03/2003 16:10, Geoff Chappell wrote: > > If A is a subClassOf B and C, should an owl (full) reasoner infer that A > > is a subClassOf the class that is the intersection of B and C? > > Yes. > > > Should it infer that A is a subClassOf the class that is the subClassOf > B and > > C? > > No. A is just one of the possible subclasses of both B and C. In fact, you > may have D as a subClassOf B and C, and D being not necessarily equal to > A. > So, THE class that is the subClassOf B and C does not exists, since it is > not unique. > > > etc? > > ? By "etc?", I meant that there seem to be an infinite number of equivalent descriptions of the same class. For example, aren't these all equivalent? - A is a subClassOf B and C - A is a subClassOf a class that is the intersectionOf B and C - A is a subClassOf a class that is the intersectionOf B and a class that is the intersectionOf C - A is a subClassOf a class that is a subClassOf B and C - ... Would a reasoner be expected to decide that any one entails any of the others? Or just that they ultimately all result in the same subClassOf relationships on A? The former seems a difficult task for a rules-based reasoner (because you end up inferring an infinite chain of subClassOf relationships). > cheers > -- e. > > Enrico Franconi - franconi@inf.unibz.it > Free University of Bozen-Bolzano - http://www.inf.unibz.it/~franconi/ > Faculty of Computer Science - Phone: (+39) 0471-315-642 > I-39100 Bozen-Bolzano BZ, Italy - Fax: (+39) 0471-315-649 Thanks, Geoff
Received on Sunday, 30 March 2003 13:40:04 UTC