Re: LANG: syntactic version for imports (and other things)

At 11:38 PM -0400 9/16/02, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
>Subject: Re: LANG: syntactic version for imports (and other things)
>Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 22:55:00 -0400
>
>>  I now fully understand the difference in understanding between me and
>>  Peter - turns out there is something in the DAML+OIL model theory
>>  that I never realized -- according to separate info that I received
>>  from Peter and others, the following turns out to be legal DAML
>>  (syntactically)
>>
>>  1)
>>  URI1 has an ontology called AAA, including class XXX
>>
>>  2)
>>  URI2 has an ontology called BBB,
>>  and a class YYY that states it is a subclass of URI1:XXX.
>>
>>  if I understand correctly, however, I am told that this means that
>>  while YYY makes this claim, since it has no imports statement to AAA,
>>  it as if this subclass statement didn't exist.
>
>I can't imagine how you came up with this idea.  The second ontology
>certainly has all the effects of the subclass statement. 
>
>What is true, at least as far as I can see, is that information about
>referenced resources is not imported unless there is an imports statement.
>That is, if document 1 contains a DAML+OIL ontology including
>    YYY rdfs:subClassOf XXX .
>and document 2 contains a DAML+OIL ontology including
>    ZZZ rdfs:subClassOf YYY .
>but no imports statements, then the ontology in document 2 knows nothing
>about YYY being a subclass of XXX.

OK, I misunderstood apologies to all.

  -JH


-- 
Professor James Hendler				  hendler@cs.umd.edu
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  240-731-3822 (Cell)
http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler

Received on Tuesday, 17 September 2002 08:23:11 UTC