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

Re: Semantics of rdf:value

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 17:41:39 -0600
Message-Id: <p05111b0fba1593a3783b@[]>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

>Reviewing the mailing list archive, the discussion of the semantics 
>of rdf:value seems have originated in:
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Nov/0648.html
>[[General comment, not specifically Primer:  the description of rdf:value is
>fine, but how does it relate to a normative specification?  What can we say
>formally about rdf:value?   What formal semantics (interpretation) allows
>us to make inferences like: ...]
>Reviewing the issues list, I find:
>   http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-replace-value
>Resolution: This issue was discussed by the RDFCore WG on 11 January 
>2002 which resolved:
>o resolves to not change the name of this property at this time on 
>the grounds:
>- insufficient reasons to make this change
>- will cause existing uses to be illegal - such as examples in m&s
>o resolves to recast this issue as a need to clarify the semantics 
>of rdf:value.
>At the February 2002 face to face meeting, the RDFCore WG resolved:
>     * that rdf:value is a property defined in the RDF namespace
>     * that the model theory state that rdf:value is a property
>     * that no other model theory semantics is defined specifically for it
>     * the issue be closed.
>In the absence of new information this issue will not be reopened.

OK, fine. But then I have a new issue, which applies to rdf:value but 
also more generally.

In cases where the WG has resolved that the model theory provides no 
semantics for a construct in the RDF namespace, I suggest that none 
of our documents, including the Primer, should be written in a way 
that suggests that the construct does have an intended meaning that 
could support any valid inferences. That is, we should be consistent 
about meaning: when things have no meaning but are being kept for 
essentially political reasons, we should say that clearly.



IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola              			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501           				(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ai.uwf.edu	          http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
s.pam@ai.uwf.edu   for spam
Received on Thursday, 5 December 2002 18:41:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:54:03 UTC