From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider ([email protected])
Date: 11/29/01
From: Pat Hayes <[email protected]>
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