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

Re: Factoring of entailment regimes (was: Re: Ill-typed vs. inconsistent?)

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 09:32:43 -0500
Cc: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, Pierre-Antoine Champin <pierre-antoine.champin@liris.cnrs.fr>, Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>, RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <CD75CB4A-E1CF-4592-A486-754BA6CBD722@w3.org>
To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>

On Nov 16, 2012, at 09:28 , Richard Cyganiak wrote:
> Background: This should make it possible to take the informative entailment rules out of Semantics, and put those for Simple Entailment and RDF-with-literals Entailment as an appendix into RDF Concepts, and those for RDFS Entailment into RDF Schema, each time with a clear statement that the normative form is the model theory found in RDF Semantics.

Yes, but is this a good idea? I thought we discussed having all the rules in a separate document (as a Note); what is wrong with that?


> Best,
> Richard

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Friday, 16 November 2012 14:33:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:02:09 UTC