W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > April 2011

Re: RDF Recommendation Set comments (re agenda for 6th April)

From: Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 12:28:03 -0400
Message-ID: <20110407.122803.942966016866190973.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: <ww@styx.org>
CC: <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
From: William Waites <ww@styx.org>
Subject: Re: RDF Recommendation Set comments (re agenda for 6th April)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 10:41:10 -0500

> * [2011-04-07 09:31:20 -0400] Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com> écrit:
> 
> ] Well, it is possible to derive contradictions in RDFS all by itself, so
> ] the answer to your question is obvious.
> 
> Is it?
> 
> -w

Yes, if you can derive contradictions in RDFS all by itself then nothing
from OWL needs to be added to RDFS to be able to derive contractions
in the extended RDFS.

peter
Received on Thursday, 7 April 2011 16:29:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:41 GMT