W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > August 2002

Re: weekly call for agenda items

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 15:46:04 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20020822153849.0223ddb0@0-mail-1.hpl.hp.com>
To: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
Cc: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

I've added these to the agenda as requested.  A couple of comments below:

At 13:30 21/08/2002 -0400, Frank Manola wrote:
>Meaning of rdf:type and relationship between RDF and RDFS;  specifically,
>
>(a) must any RDF processor understand the object of an rdf:type property 
>as being an rdfs:Class (and hence understand what an rdfs:Class is)?

Converting this to a test case, (which may or may not capture Frank's 
intended question), I suggest that an RDF processor is not required to 
conclude

   _:b rdf:type rdfs:Class .

from:

   _:a rdf:type _:b .

That is a job for rdfs reasoning on rdfs:range.


>(b) must an RDF processor that understands what an rdfs:Class is also 
>understand the rest of the RDFS vocabulary?

I'm not sure how to reduce this to a test case.  If the intent is to ask 
whether any processor capable of implementing the above entailment, must 
implement all of the RDFS closure rules, why might we be tempted to say that?

Brian


>Brian McBride wrote:
>
>>This is the usual weekly call for agenda items for this weeks telecon, 
>>which I need by noon uk time Thursday.
>>Currently on my list of possibles:
>>1. Using XMLSchema-instance attributes in RDF/XML Syntax (fwd)
>>2. rdf:Alt's relationship to individual statements
>>3. datatypes (use cases in cc/pp, dc and p3p) and community feedback
>>4. formally closing rdfms-assertion
>
>
>--
>Frank Manola                   The MITRE Corporation
>202 Burlington Road, MS A345   Bedford, MA 01730-1420
>mailto:fmanola@mitre.org       voice: 781-271-8147   FAX: 781-271-875
Received on Thursday, 22 August 2002 10:47:48 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:50:27 EDT