W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > August 2001

Re: model theory (Alt and disjunction: just say no)

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 16:14:54 -0700
Message-Id: <v04210112b7b3271a657d@[]>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>pat hayes wrote:
> >
> > Attached is the final version of the MT document.
>|Alternatives are transparent containers which have a special
>|>> if x is in IALT then for any z in IP, <x y> is in IEXT(z) iff
>|for some n, <x(n) y> is in IEXT(z)
>Let's not go there/do that.

Well, OK, I tend to agree. However...

>Alt is just another class. There's nothing special about it
>except that applications can treat it specially because
>they know its name.

That isnt what the M&S says. It is quite clear on the point that Alt 
has a disjunctive interpretation. I agree that this was a crock, but 
I think it is what the M&S says (in contast to the 'bag' 
interpretations you note.)

But by all means lets erase it from anything said publicly in the 
name of the WG.


>	_:something :relatedTo _:C.
>	_:C rdf:type rdf:Alt.
>	_:C rdf:_1 _:x.
>	_:C rdf:_2 _:y.
>then we neither license
>	_:something :relatedTo _:x.
>	_:something :relatedTo _:y.
>This is similar to the situation where folks assume that
>	_:something dc:creator _:C.
>	_:C a rdf:Bag.
>	_:C rdf:_1 _:Kernighan.
>	_:C rdf:_2 _:Ritchie.
>	_:something dc:creator _:Kernighan.
>But it doesn't. Documentation for the dc:creator property
>might say that *for that property* the above inference
>is licensed. But it's not a feature of the RDF core language.
>Similarly for rdf:Alt.
>Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/

(650)859 6569 w
(650)494 3973 h (until September)
Received on Wednesday, 29 August 2001 19:13:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:53:50 UTC