- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 13:29:56 +0300
- To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Thanks to Martin Merry for this one. Going with the current S&AS wording, we might read it as saying that: - given an RDF document - we examine it syntactically - if it is in OWL DL then we apply the direct semantics - otherwise we apply the OWL Full semantics (Martin was actually working from the consensus resolution of 5.3) Document A: eg:a rdfs:subClassOf eg:b . Document B: _:b rdf:type owl:Thing . Document A* eg:a rdfs:subClassOf eg:b . eg:a rdf:type owl:Class . eg:b rdf:type owl:Class. Document A** eg:a rdfs:subClassOf eg:b . eg:a rdf:type owl:Class . eg:b rdf:type owl:Class. owl:Thing owl:equivalentClass owl:Nothing . A is not in OWL DL, therefore A entails B (since in OWL Full, owl:Thing and rdfs:Resource are equivalent and not empty) A* is in OWL DL, but is a monotonic extension of A. A* does not entail B (since A** is consistent) Jeremy
Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2003 07:30:06 UTC