Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
Ian Horrocks says:
Now you have pointed out the basic trick, I wonder why the set of axioms for
expressing this rule is so
complex. In particular, why do we need it to be the case that manman(x,x) <=>
Man(x) -- wouldn't it be
enough that Man(x) => manman(x,x)? We could also do without reflexivity -- we
could simply use an
existential restriction to force the existence of *some* manman relation and
then use (sibling manman
InverseObjectProperty(manman)) as the role chain implying brother. This would
give:
SubClassOf(Man ObjectExists(manman Thing))
SubObjectPropertyOf(SubObjectPropertyChain(sibling manman
InverseObjectProperty(manman)) brother)
Original comment by alanruttenberg@gmail.com
on 6 Oct 2007 at 3:27
Original comment by alanruttenberg@gmail.com
on 25 Oct 2007 at 4:43
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
alanruttenberg@gmail.com
on 3 Oct 2007 at 5:13