- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 23:21:46 -0400
- To: "Pat Hayes" <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Cc: "Stuart Williams" <skw@hp.com>, www-tag@w3.org
On 8/14/07, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> wrote: > None of this has the slightest relevance to OWL semantics, which do > not mention contexts or 'objective' truth, or time. OWL is not a > language whose meaning can be reinvented to suit each particular use: > its semantics are defined mathematically and are normative, so if you > use OWL syntax with a different semantics then you are not following > the OWL specs. The OWL semantics says that AAA owl:sameAs BBB is true > in an interpretation I when I(AAA)=I(BBB). Interesting, that was news to me. I was going by what I thought was the definition in the OWL language reference, rather than the actual definition in the OWL semantics document. I'll have to mull over what the real definition means in the context of my argument. Mark. -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies http://www.coactus.com
Received on Wednesday, 15 August 2007 03:21:59 UTC