- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 03:13:50 +0200
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: phayes@ai.uwf.edu, www-webont-wg@w3.org
[...]
> > the one that I can go with is
> >
> > :John a :Student .
> > :John a :Employee .
> > :C owl:intersectionOf ( :Student :Employee ) .
> > OWL-entails
> > :John a :C .
> >
> > as all models of the premis are also models of the conclusion
> > and no new existentials are introduced in the entailment rules
> > (the lists in the conclusions are identical clones)
>
> Do you have a complete way of transforming from the natural entailment
to
> this entailment?
well Peter, I don't know what you mean with "natural entailment"
I guess it's the one that you wanted to hold i.e.
:John a :Student .
:John a :Employee .
OWL-entails
:John owl:intersectionOf ( :Student :Employee ) .
but I still don't understand the question (and it's 3:12 AM here)
what we have is
{
<http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/owl-rules#rule9c4> .
:C owl:intersectionOf ( :Student :Employee).
{
<http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/owl-rules#rule14i2> .
:John a :Student.
{
<http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/owl-rules#rule14i2> .
:John a :Employee.
{
<http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/owl-rules#rule14i1> } |=
{:John ns:inEachOf ( )}} |=
{:John ns:inEachOf ( :Employee)}} |=
{:John ns:inEachOf ( :Student :Employee)}} |=
{:John a :C}.
using
{ :rule9c4 . ?C owl:intersectionOf ?L . ?x :inEachOf ?L } log:implies { ?x
a ?C } .
{ :rule14i1 } log:implies { ?x :inEachOf ( ) } .
{ :rule14i2 . ?x a ?a . ?x :inEachOf ?b } log:implies { ?x :inEachOf [
rdf:first ?a; rdf:rest ?b ] } .
and I think it is quite natural to explicitly give
:C owl:intersectionOf ( :Student :Employee ) .
as a premis, no?
-- ,
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Wednesday, 21 August 2002 21:14:29 UTC