Hello Chris, (01)
On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 01:08:57PM -0500, Chris Menzel wrote:
> > So someone trying to define OWL FOL would have to be careful to stay in
> > first
> > order logic because Properties are first class entities ? Would that be a
> > difficult problem ?
> As long as one adds no special semantic requirement that there must be as
> many properties as there are sets of individuals (which, by Cantor's
> Theorem, is simply impossible to require if properties are "first-class
> entities", i.e., a species of individual), there is no risk of moving
> beyond first-order logic. (02)
After some reading, I think I begin to understand this. As long as the
properties I can quantify over are first class entities, I have Henkin
semantics. Only if I can quantify over all possible properties, I get true
second order logic. (03)
Regards, (04)
Michael Brunnbauer (05)
--
++ Michael Brunnbauer
++ netEstate GmbH
++ Geisenhausener Straße 11a
++ 81379 München
++ Tel +49 89 32 19 77 80
++ Fax +49 89 32 19 77 89
++ E-Mail brunni@xxxxxxxxxxxx
++ http://www.netestate.de/
++
++ Sitz: München, HRB Nr.142452 (Handelsregister B München)
++ USt-IdNr. DE221033342
++ Geschäftsführer: Michael Brunnbauer, Franz Brunnbauer
++ Prokurist: Dipl. Kfm. (Univ.) Markus Hendel (06)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (07)
|