Re: problems with DAML+OIL

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider (
Date: 01/16/01

Actually, I wasn't necessarily plugging for a model theory for identity.
My intent was to argue for a full theory of identity (or equality), not
just the simple addition of equality/inequality axioms, although I think
that this is the way to do.  In addition to equality/inequality axioms, we
need to know about equality/inequality of the RDF(S) ``built-in''s, such as


From: pat hayes <>
Subject: Re: problems with DAML+OIL
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 15:15:51 -0800

> Jim Hendler wrote:
> >At 9:55 -0500 1/12/01, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> >>.......
> >>OK, now that there is a DAML+OIL release, it is time to try to put a
> >>spanner in the works.  (Not that it is time to sabotage the release, it is
> >>just that it is now time to see what problems remain, so that the next
> >>release can fix them.)  I expect that this list is not complete!
> >>
> >>
> >>Problem 1:  The lack of a theory of identity (or equality, or equivalence)
> >>
> >
> >I agree with Peter that this is important, and that we need it. 
> >However, I wonder if the correct solution isn't a langauge feature 
> >to allow it to be said -- we have the ability to say things are the 
> >same class or same property -- why not a similar explicit construct 
> >for same entity?
> I think the point is not that we couldn't add the ability to say 
> something like same-entity, but more the issue of what we would mean 
> when we say it. Peter refers to a lack of a *theory* of identity. 
> Cunning man, he knows that a 'theory of identity' amounts to a model 
> theory.
> Pat Hayes
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
> 40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
> Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST