- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
- Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 02:27:03 +0100
- To: "Jeremy Carroll <jjc" <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org, www-webont-wg-request@w3.org
You are right Jeremy, I'm completely wrong
(even in my punctuation as Peter pointed out)
(this was a terrible day)
-- ,
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Jeremy Carroll
<jjc@hpl.hp.com> To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Sent by: cc:
www-webont-wg-requ Subject: Re: correction RE: The Ugly Test
est@w3.org
2003-02-01 09:35
PM
> [wasn't completely awake when I wrote earlier reply; hope I'm now]
I don't think I am counting on it ! :)
> given that
> the range of p is one of 1,2,3,4
> the range of p is one of 3,4,5,6
> the range of p is one of 2,4,6,8
> then it is the case that
> (or we could entail that)
* empty *
> which is consistent with
any consistent system
hence what?
I started with an inconsistent set of premises and you split that into two
consistent subsets and worked on them independently.
I deduced falsity from my inconsistent premises, and then proved whatever
theorem I wanted.
Jos:
| I believe that this is not following from AS&S
| at least I can't conclude it from such piece as
| if E is rdfs:range
| then for x element of IOP, y element of IOC U IDC
| <x,y> element of EXTi(Si(E)) iff
| <w,z> element of EXTi(x) -> z element of CEXTi(y)
| which we interpret as
| {?x rdfs:range ?y. ?w ?x ?z} => {?z rdf:type ?y}.
| {?z rdfs:subClassOf ?y. ?x rdfs:range ?z} => {?x rdfs:range ?y}.
If those last two rules are not in the direct semantics then that looks
like a
bug with them to me. (I haven't looked at section 3 much though).
(They are in RDF semantics, if I have understood correctly, maybe not the
latter).
Jeremy
Received on Saturday, 1 February 2003 20:27:58 UTC