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

RE: Monotonicity

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 14:05:01 -0000
To: "Sergey Melnik" <melnik@db.stanford.edu>
Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JAEBJCLMIFLKLOJGMELDKEPNCCAA.jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>

>
> I thought monotonicity was a feature, not a bug. As far as I remember
> what logics etc. was about, if we drop monotonicity things become really
> hairy and computationally impractical even for small data/knowledge
> bases. Please correct me if I'm wrong...

Agree - monotonicity is a very high want.

>
> Does TDL require non-monotonic reasoning?

No.

>
> Sergey
>
>

We seem to be very near to closure now, so I think for now we can drop the
topic and only come back to it later if necessary.

If interested ...

The point of the original message was meant to indicate a subtle difference
between S-P and TDL at the model theoretic level, roughly: TDL is monotonic
in datatypes, and S-P isn't.
The difference was that in S-P the MT representation of rdf:value was
defined with a finite known set of datatypes, and TDL used the same
definition but with arbitrary unknown datatypes added. The resulting final
TDL and S-P definitions of rdf:value looked very different but that was
superficial.

Jeremy
Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2002 09:04:57 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:45:05 EDT