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

RE: NP completeness & rdf entailment, graph identity, MT etc.

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 16:07:14 -0500
Message-Id: <p0510100fb7e7c58e6c0c@[205.160.76.193]>
To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>Aaron:
>>  Oh dear, I sure hope my RDF parser doesn't start returning
>>  _that_ any time soon. We've built something of a layered
>>  architecture in RDF, and I want to keep it that way. I see no
>>  reason an RDF parser should have to believe in the RDF Model
>>  Theory. Instead, it should just spit out triples for a
>>  higher-level application to deal with. It should definitely not
>>  be allowed to start adding or deleting triples (unless
>>  specifically asked to by the application.
>>
>
>I find this paragraph more convincing now than I did last week.
>
>It suggests that rather than the conventional concrete versus abstract
>syntax distinction, we have a rather richer set of layers:
>
>
>    Semantics:                  Model Theory
>    Second Level Abstraction:   Graph
>    First Level Abstraction:    Triples (Multiset)
>    Concrete Syntax:            RDF/XML & N-Triple
>
>
>I guess last week I was assuming that the first level abstraction was not
>useful.

Model theory not useful!??! Humph!!

Good job I'm a reasonable man, Jeremy.

Pat

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
phayes@ai.uwf.edu 
http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Monday, 8 October 2001 17:07:19 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:40:58 EDT