- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 20:17:44 -0500
- To: phayes@ai.uwf.edu
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu> Subject: Re: The Peter paradox isn't. Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 15:40:08 -0600 [...] > >The summary of all this is that if you want to be a same-syntax extension > >of the RDF model theory and you have > >a) rdf:type as a property; > >b) defined classes, like DAML+OIL restrictions; > >c) some sort of complement or negation; and > >d) self reference > Before I invest a lot of time in reading through the rest of this, > could you clarify what you mean here by 'self-reference'? I ask > because in any sense of that term that I know of, neither RDF nor > DAML is self-referential, and previous discussion on this thread has > confused self-reference with nonwellfoundedness. [...] I guess that I was not clear with this. By self-reference, I only mean that a restriction can point back to itself. peter PS: Any suggestions for a better name for this?
Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2002 20:19:40 UTC