- From: <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 22:36:45 +0200
- To: pfps@research.bell-labs.com
- Cc: jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com, www-webont-wg@w3.org
> Here is another test case
>
> R:
> John rdf:type Person .
> Bill rdf:type Person .
> John child Bill .
> entailing
> John rdf:type _:1 .
> _:1 rdf:type daml:Restriction .
> _:1 rdf:onProperty child .
> _:1 rdf:hasClass :_1 .
>
> This is a very different situation from that in Jeremy's cases, even case C.
Peter, it is _:label ;-) (just think about an anonymous namespace prefix)
could it be that that restriction is the class Person itself???
at least that's what we get after some testing
( <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/n3/psra.n3>
<http://www.w3.org/2001/10/daml+oil#> )
log:entails
<http://www.agfa.com/w3c/n3/psrc.n3> .
i.e.
:John a :Person .
:Bill a :Person .
:John :child :Bill .
OWL-entails
:John a ( owl:Restriction _:x owl:onProperty :child owl:hasClass _:x ) .
we use http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/owl-rules.n3
more specifically entailment rule9g and rule9h
which is using shorthand () list notation
(maybe too liberal, but this is just testing...)
the proof argument we find is
{
<http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/owl-rules#rule9h> .
:Bill a :Person.
:John :child :Bill} log:implies
{:John a ( owl:Restriction :Person owl:onProperty :child owl:hasClass :Person)}.
speaking about selfreference...
--
Jos
Received on Monday, 22 April 2002 19:18:55 UTC