W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2010

Re: [TF-Ent] RIF Core Entailment section

From: Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@ccf.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 12:30:28 -0500
To: "Axel Polleres" <axel.polleres@deri.org>
cc: "SPARQL Working Group WG" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>, "Birte Glimm" <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, "Ivan Herman" <ivan@w3.org>, "Sandro Hawke" <sandro@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C7BE92E4.104AC%ogbujic@ccf.org>
On 3/10/10 12:58 PM, "Axel Polleres" <axel.polleres@deri.org> wrote:
> "The compatibility document defines 3 additional notions of RIF
> satisfiability with respect to a combination that builds on simple
> entailment: RIF-RDF, RIF-RDFS, and RIF-D satisfiability."
> I's suggest to  mention RIF-simple satisfiability, explicitly, before.

I've reworded that part to better explain how the RIF-simple model theory is
the basis for the other 3 and emphasized that entailment regime is only for
simple entailment (it is now called Simple RIF Core).

> "For the purpose of this entailment regime, we will only define
> answers with respect to those RDF graphs that are RIF-RDF satisfiable
> and RIF-RDF-entailed by the combination formed from the scoping graph
> and a referenced, strongly safe RIF-Core [RIF-Core] document."
> why not RIF-simple?

See above

> ---
> "Any legal RDF graph. RDF graphs that do not have a statement with a
> predicate of rif-rdf:usesRuleset will not be applicable to this
> entailment regime"
> I find this too strong. It seems to preclude to use e.g. an RDF stroe
> which has some default Ruleset, it uses.
> Can we get around this?

I'm not sure how else you can be explicit about the ruleset that will be
used to form the combination.

> ------
> "well-formed RDF triples that are RIF-RDF-entailed by the RIF-RDF
> combination formed from SG and the strongly safe RIF core documents
> referenced from SG via the rif-rdf:usesRuleset predicate."
> this seems to include all the RDF axiomatic triples! so possibly
> infinite answers, unless you meant to use s/RIF-RDF/RIF-simple/g in
> all the above said.

Yes, this has all been changed to use RIF simple, so conditions that limit
the solutions to terms in a vocabulary to ensure finiteness are no longer
needed (in the case of combinations with a strongly safe RIF core document).
> However, I think we could - quite easily - extend that to RIF-RDF and
> RIF-RDFS alalogoosly as we do it for the RDF and RDFS entailment regimes!

I'm planning on adding an informative section on how the mechanisms such as
the embeddings in the RIF-RDF compatibility document can be used to build
other RIF Core entailment regimes that coincide with (finite) RDF, RDFS, and
OWL2-RL entailment.

-- Chime


P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

Cleveland Clinic is ranked one of the top hospitals
in America by U.S.News & World Report (2009).  
Visit us online at http://www.clevelandclinic.org for
a complete listing of our services, staff and

Confidentiality Note:  This message is intended for use
only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed
and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable
law.  If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient or the employee or agent responsible for
delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If
you have received this communication in error,  please
contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in
its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy.  Thank you.
Received on Thursday, 11 March 2010 17:51:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:59 UTC