- 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