- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 03:02:30 +0200
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
[...] > > > Why should anyone care at all about the entailment rules? > > > > because > > > [...] > > OK, agreed, entailment can be related to *inference* rules. > > But why should I care whether ``no new existentials are introduced in the > [inference] rules''? OK, e.g. we can't have existentials in the conclusion that are in the domain of an owl:InverseFunctionalProperty because that property is simply not defined over it's whole range (lists in the range of e.g. owl:intersectionOf could contain a mix of resources being classes, properties, classes/properties and so many of such intersections simply don't exist and in general we can't give the list constraints in the premis) -- , Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Friday, 23 August 2002 21:03:08 UTC