From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider (pfps@research.bell-labs.com)
Date: 11/29/01
From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu> Subject: Re: querying DAML+OIL syntax Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 19:44:07 -0600 > > > >Untouchable - should not make it into the model theory > > Why? (Because they use constructions defined by rdf:parseType??) > > > > > Ontology versionInfo imports > > > > unionOf intersectionOf disjointUnionOf oneOf > > complementOf > > > > onProperty toClass hasValue > > hasClass minCardinality maxCardinality cardinality > > hasClassQ minCardinalityQ maxCardinalityQ cardinalityQ > > > > equivalentTo sameClassAs samePropertyAs sameIndividualAs > > disjointWith differentIndividualFrom inverseOf > > Pat To be more precise, perhaps. The above constructs are DAML+OIL syntax and should not generate relationships in the model theory. For example (using a much nicer syntax) (unionOf a (intersectionOf b c)) should not result in a unionOf relationship in the model theory. Why? Well, if it did then how could you get an entailment between A = (unionOf a (intersectionOf b c)) and B = (intersectionOf (unionOf a b) (unionOf b c)) peter
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST