- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 12:09:53 +0100
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- CC: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Jeremy Carroll wrote: > > > How about this: > > eg:c rdf:type owl:Class . > eg:d rdf:type owl:Class . > eg:ap rdf:type AnnotationProperty . > owl:Thing owl:oneOf rdf:nil . > > entails > > eg:c eg:ap eg:d . > > > ==== > > I think this holds in OWL Full but not in OWL DL, yet it is within the > syntactic subset. As Mehrdad points out this is actually an OWL DL entailment, since owl:Thing is non-empty. Updated problem case is: eg:p rdf:type owl:ObjectProperty . eg:q rdf:type owl:ObjectProperty . owl:Thing owl:oneOf _:b . _:b rdf:first eg:i . _:b rdf:rest rdf:nil. eg:i rdf:type owl:Thing. eg:i eg:p eg:i . entails eg:i eg:q eg:i . True in OWL full, since the universe has only one element thus eg:q and eg:p are the same property. False in OWL DL. Jeremy
Received on Thursday, 3 July 2003 07:11:51 UTC