- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 22:59:58 +0200
- To: "Jeremy Carroll <jjc" <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
> Jos,
> concerning the restriction.
>
> I don't follow your reasoning.
>
> From S&AS section 5
>
> If
> <x,y> in EXTI(SI(owl:hasValue))) and
> <x,p> in EXTI(SI(owl:onProperty)))
>
> then
> x in IOR, y in IOC union IDC, p in IOOP union IODP, and CEXTI(x) =
>
> (that's a bug in S&AS - it should read y in IOT union LV1)
>
> {u ***in IOT*** | <u, y> in EXTI(p) }
>
>
> Your reasoning is unsound with respect to the starred part of the
semantics.
OK, in OWL ***Full*** it should be
{u in RI | <u, y> in EXTI(p) }
and let's do that explicitly for
all such instead of simply saying
IOT = RI
IOC = CEXTI(SI(rdfs:Class))
IOP = CEXTI(SI(rdf:Property))
--
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Monday, 30 June 2003 17:00:10 UTC