- From: Chris Menzel <cmenzel@tamu.edu>
- Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 13:28:24 -0500
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 01:09:29PM -0400, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > > From: Chris Menzel <cmenzel@tamu.edu> > Subject: Re: Some questions about the exact meanings > Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 11:51:03 -0500 > > > > > What is the _right_ axiom schema for OWL: with implication > > > > or with equivalence? > > > > > > ...the answer is <=>. OWL generally takes an extensional stance > > > on such questions. If the conditions for some characteristic > > > hold, then the characteristic holds. > > > > I think that's just Tanel's question, though. > > I thought that his question was which stance OWL took. It appears it was. I read too much into "_right_". > > Do you really want "Loves", say, to be classified as a symmetric > > relation if it just happens to turn out in one's domain that all > > love is requited? > > > Well, yes... Fine. The issue, as you are aware, is just whether properties like symmetry should only indicate something contingent about a relation's extension or something stronger about its "nature". Either view can be useful. Chris Menzel
Received on Wednesday, 1 October 2003 14:28:27 UTC