W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-dev@w3.org > October to December 2007

Re: [OWLWG-COMMENT] ISSUE-67 (reification): real semantic-free RDF-comments

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 14:28:29 -0600
Message-Id: <p06230909c37622a7dbd1@[10.100.0.57]>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Cc: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>, Owl Dev <public-owl-dev@w3.org>, Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>, bmotik@cs.man.ac.uk

>Pat Hayes wrote:
>
>>Hmm. But it also means that any RDF graph *entails* the same graph 
>>with an arbitrary number of these triples added. So all graphs 
>>entail themselves with random "comments" attached in random 
>>"places". This does not seem like what one would want a reasoning 
>>engine to do, so how does one give a semantic justification for not 
>>allowing it?
>>
>
>If annotations are meaningless (as some people claim) then adding 
>annotations does not change the meaning, and a reasoning engine that 
>adds an annotation e.g.
>
>eg:eg
>   rdfs:comment "The reasoning engine loaded this at 6.34 pm" .
>
>then so be it.
>
>It is at least arguable - if people really want that, then I would 
>like that to be clear.

Well, true. If that really is what people want. But I wonder if it 
really is. Dark triples would be safer.

Pat


>
>Jeremy


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC		(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502			(850)291 0667    cell
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Friday, 30 November 2007 20:28:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 27 March 2013 09:32:55 GMT