- From: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 22:02:49 +0100
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Pat, Now we seem to have a come to a better understanding about the correspondence between FOL and OWL, could you re-answer the following question. Thanks, Ian >Pat, > >DAML+OIL, and I hope OWL, can be viewed a fragment of FOL, with atomic >classes and properties corresponding to unary and binary predicates >respectively. According to this correspondence, subClassOf axioms >become implications, e.g., A subClassOf B corresponds to: > >forall x . A(x) -> B(x) > >Similarly, a property range axiom P range A corresponds to: > >forall x,y P(x,y) -> A(y). > >What could be simpler and clearer than that? > >The combination of these two sentences entails >forall x,y P(x,y) -> B(y). > >What could be simpler and clearer than that? > >If you want some alternative semantics, could you please explain in >similar terms what it is?
Received on Wednesday, 25 September 2002 16:05:30 UTC