- From: Drew McDermott <drew.mcdermott@yale.edu>
- Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 15:40:44 -0400 (EDT)
- To: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
[me]
>Well, our disagreement is clear, but, at least in part, easily
>settled. In our view, 'imports' *is* magic syntax, and not a property
>of anything.
[Pat Hayes]
I agree, that is the only sensible way to look at it. If/when we get
around to putting something like this into the CL standard it will
definitely be a special syntax, not a normal logical assertion. If it
were an assertion it would have to be in a special meta-level
concerned with ontologies as entities, and I don't think anyone wants
to get involved with that.
In case anyone needs further arguments in favor of this position,
consider this one: If 'imports' is a property, then I can make
statements like:
"There exists an ontology that this one imports."
"Ont-1 imports every elements of {Ont-A, Ont-B, Ont-C} that Ont-2
does not import."
"Ont-1 imports every ontology that doesn't import itself."
These are pernicious but unavoidable as far as I can see.
-- Drew McDermott
Received on Tuesday, 30 April 2002 15:40:55 UTC