W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > August 2012

Re: RDF-ISSUE-90 (LV-entailment): Define a simple form of “literal value entailment” [RDF Semantics]

From: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 11:19:47 +0200
Message-ID: <502A1833.9000607@emse.fr>
To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
CC: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
One more clarification: I've integrated something that Pat suggested 
several times already, namely that the interpretation is independent of 
a vocabulary V. Otherwise, the definition can be rephrased as:

"""
Let D be a datatype map. We define an LV-interpretation(D) of a 
vocabulary V (or, LV-interpretation with respect to D of a vocabulary V) 
as a simple interpretation I of V which satisfies the following conditions:

*LV semantic conditions.*
  - if <aaa,x> is in D then for any typed literal "sss"^^ddd in V with 
I(ddd) = x,
   * if sss is in the lexical space of x then IL("sss"^^ddd) = L2V(x)(sss),
   * otherwise IL("sss"^^ddd) is not in LV
"""


AZ

Le 14/08/2012 11:14, Antoine Zimmermann a écrit :
> Clarification: an rdf-interpretation would be a LV-interpretation wrt
> the datatype map that contains rdf:XMLLiteral, xsd:string and rdf:HTML.
> But it would not be *simply* that.
>
> Here is a proposal for the semantics of LV-entailment:
>
> [...We have to assume that datatypes and datatype maps have been
> formally introduced before...]
>
> """
> Let D be a datatype map. We define an LV-interpretation(D) (or,
> LV-interpretation with respect to D) as a simple interpretation I which
> satisfies the following conditions:
>
> *LV semantic conditions.*
> - if <aaa,x> is in D then for any typed literal "sss"^^ddd with I(ddd) = x,
> * if sss is in the lexical space of x then IL("sss"^^ddd) = L2V(x)(sss),
> * otherwise IL("sss"^^ddd) is not in LV
> """
>
> Can Pat check if this is correct and sufficient?
>
>
>
> AZ
>
> Le 14/08/2012 10:54, Antoine Zimmermann a écrit :
>>
>>
>> Le 21/05/2012 16:08, RDF Working Group Issue Tracker a écrit :
>>> RDF-ISSUE-90 (LV-entailment): Define a simple form of “literal value
>>> entailment” [RDF Semantics]
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/90
>>>
>>> Raised by: Richard Cyganiak
>>> On product: RDF Semantics
>>>
>>> Define a simple form of graph equivalence that is like graph
>>> isomorphism, but allows substitution of literals by equal-valued other
>>> lexical forms. This would help with test cases and the like. It could
>>> be defined as a form of entailment (LV-Entailment, a small extension
>>> to Simple Entailment) or as an extension to graph isomorphism.
>>>
>>> (Would the old RDF-Entailment then simply be LV-Entailment over a
>>> datatype map that contains only rdf:XMLLiteral?)
>>
>>
>> No because an rdf-interpretation also has:
>>
>> "x is in IP if and only if <x, I(rdf:Property)> is in IEXT(I(rdf:type))"
>>
>>
>>
>

-- 
Antoine Zimmermann
ISCOD / LSTI - Institut Henri Fayol
École Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Saint-Étienne
158 cours Fauriel
42023 Saint-Étienne Cedex 2
France
Tél:+33(0)4 77 42 66 03
Fax:+33(0)4 77 42 66 66
http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/
Received on Tuesday, 14 August 2012 09:20:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:02:06 UTC