<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Hi, I'm a novice about roles, so take care about what I say. In
general roles may be considered as univerally quantified formulae,
for example "A(x) <- B(x); C(x)" corresponds to the first order
formula "(forall x)(B(x) and C(x) -> A(x)".<br>
<br>
Reasoning about roles themselves sounds like higher-level reasoning,
which is not strictly related to quantifiers. May you provide some
example to clarify?<br>
<br>
Cristiano Longo<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Il 01/03/2011 06:20, Steve W ha scritto:
<blockquote
cite="mid:AANLkTikWbUGCtBMgM0BG4P=NWO9UkwUV8U8EVDeLFR+5@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">Hi,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Is there any variant of DL out there that allows
quantification over roles? I believe that's quite different to
restriction of a concept by a role. If I want to reason over
roles themselves, e.g., whether there exists a particular role
such that some property holds, I'd need quantification over
roles -- is that right?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks in advance for any input.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Regards,</div>
<div>Steve</div>
<pre wrap="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
---
** You received this mail via the description logic mailing list; for more **
** information, visit the description logic homepage at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://dl.kr.org/">http://dl.kr.org/</a>. **
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>