W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-comments@w3.org > October 2013

Re: rdfs:Graph ? comment on http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#section-dataset and issue 35

From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2013 01:11:13 -0400
Message-ID: <524BAAF1.2060409@dbooth.org>
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
CC: "public-rdf-comments@w3.org Comments" <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>
Pat or Sandro,

Regarding this discussion:
[[
On 09/12/2013 12:33 AM, David Booth wrote:
> [Let's move this discussion to www-archive@w3.org please, as it isn't
> relevant to Jeremy's comment.  All follow-ups there please.]
>
> On 09/11/2013 10:32 PM, Pat Hayes wrote:
[ . . . ]
>> But each IRI denotes one thing, in all
>> possible interpretations.
>
> No, in *each* possible interpretation, not in *all* possible
> interpretations.  I.e.,
>
>    For any interpretation I and URIs U1 and U2,
>    (U1=U2) => (I(U1) = I(U1))
>
> NOT:
>
>    For any interpretations II and I2, and URIs U1 and U2,
>    (U1=U2) => (I1(U1) = I2(U2))
>
> I.e., the uniqueness does not hold *across* interpretations.  It only
> holds within *each* interpretation individually.
>
>> (The current RDF 1.1 semantics socument
>> makes thie very explicit, by the way.)
>
> Yes, I noticed that, and the current wording is *incorrect*.  It needs
> to be fixed, as it wrongly implies that RDF may only be viewed from the
> perspective of a single RDF interpretation, and that is simply *wrong*.
]]

In looking for the offending statement in the current RDF Semantics 
draft I am not currently able to find it.  So I'm wondering if the draft 
was changed since I noticed the problem.

How can I view previous versions of the editor's drafts?

Thanks,
David
Received on Wednesday, 2 October 2013 05:11:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:29:58 UTC