Re: querying DAML+OIL syntax

From: Pat Hayes (
Date: 12/04/01

>From: Pat Hayes <>
>Subject: Re: querying DAML+OIL syntax
>Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 21:56:39 -0600
>>  >From: Pat Hayes <>
>>  >Subject: Re: querying DAML+OIL syntax
>>  >Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 19:44:07 -0600
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >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.
>>  What should the MT say about it, then? That it refers to George W. Bush?
>The MT should say that the extension of this is the union of the 
>extension (CEXT)
>of a and the intersection of the extensions (CEXT) of b and c.   There
>should not be unionOf or intersectionOf or any argument-syntax
>relationships in the MT, because all that is syntax, unless there is some
>way of getting the MT to produce the correct entailments in their presence.

OK , I see your point. But why can we not simply have some special 
semantic conditions that restrict models to those in which if they 
contain unionOf (etc) relationships, then they must also contain the 
meanings of those pieces of DAML syntax. Call them damlish 
interpretations. Then the appropriate notion of entailment will be 
defined with respect to damlish interpretations only, of course; and 
it will be some work to show that this corresponds to whatever the 
RDF version of DAML inference rules looks like, but it shouldn't be 
impossible. That is, it seems to me that the *presence* of syntax in 
the MT isn't the real problem here, but the potential *absence* of 
the required semantic constraints; and that can be solved by fiat. 
Ugly, but workable, no?

>I don't know of any way to recover the correct entailments in the presence
>of syntax relationships.  Perhaps others do.  If so, please speak up now.

If there is something I am simply missing, let me know.


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