W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2006

Re: Editorial changes in Section 2.5

From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 17:50:11 +0000
Message-ID: <43F21853.5060500@hp.com>
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
CC: Enrico Franconi <franconi@inf.unibz.it>, RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>



Pat Hayes wrote:
>> On 13 Feb 2006, at 22:12, Pat Hayes wrote:
>>> --------
>>> Definition: E-entailment Regime
>>>
>>> An E-entailment regime is a relation between a subset of RDF graphs 
>>> and a subset of basic graph patterns.
>>>
>>> A basic graph pattern in the range of an E-entailment is called 
>>> well- formed for the E-entailment.
>>> --------
>>>
>>> Was this in version 1.623 when we took the vote?? If so, I 
>>> apologize for not noticing it at the time, but this is broken. 
>>> Entailment is a relationship between graphs, because *by 
>>> definition* it refers to truth of the graph in an interpretation. 
>>> Patterns don't have truthvalues in interpretations. So what it 
>>> should say is that an E-entailment regime is a relation between RDF 
>>> graphs, defined on a subset of RDF graphs. The graphs in the subset 
>>> are called well-formed for the entailment regime. (I'd avoid the 
>>> use of 'range' here, see below.)
>> You're right.
>>
>> """
>> Definition: E-entailment Regime
>> An E-entailment regime is a binary relation between subsets of RDF graphs.
>> A graph in the range of an E-entailment is called well-formed for 
>> the E-entailment.
>> """
>>
>> (we need range here since the domain may not be the same as the 
>> range -- e.g., OWL-DL query answering).
> 
> Ah, I see. But there are expository reasons for not using that very 
> word without explanation, see my earlier mail.
> 
> Pat

I have made the change to (v1.640)

"""
Definition: E-entailment Regime

An E-entailment regime is a binary relation between subsets of RDF graphs.
A graph in the range of an E-entailment is called well-formed for
the E-entailment.
"""
which still uses the word 'range'.  If there is an editorial proposal for a 
wording that does not use 'range', I'll consider it (as per the telecon 
decision) - the change is made now because it is at least better than the 
wrongly worded we did have.

	Andy




> 
> 
>> --e.
>>
>> Attachment converted: betelguese2:smime 27.p7s (    /    ) (00237A7A)
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 14 February 2006 17:50:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:25 GMT