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

Re: new semantics initiative drafts

From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 00:41:42 +0200
To: guha@guha.com
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, phayes@ai.uwf.edu
Message-ID: <OFE5B5C5F1.6BB509D0-ONC1256BD5.007A3B92@agfa.be>


Guha,

> I don't think there should be any impact on the test cases.

that's what I thought too, at least after having read
http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes/RDF(S)_based_on_Lbase.html

> I would like your feedback however on how something like
> lbase could impact and interact with Euler

I believe what's written

[[[
   Model theory is usually most relevant to implementation
   via the notion of entailment, described later, and by
   making it possible to define valid inference rules.
]]]
    -- http://tap.stanford.edu/SemanticWebSemantics.html

and in that sense MT is good news and we try to
obey MT (maybe also because those are the initials
of my wife ;-)


I've been thinking a lot recently about function terms
i.e. the thing we called "functionial terms" in
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Jun/0078.html


I think I'm not completely understanding the last part of

[[[
   Further, we believe that a melange of model theories
   will adversely impact developers building agents that
   implement proof systems for these layers, since the
   proof systems will likely be different for each layer.
]]]
    -- http://tap.stanford.edu/SemanticWebSemantics.html

but anyhow, this gives us also a strong motivation/challenge

-- .
Jos
Received on Tuesday, 11 June 2002 18:42:49 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:49:13 EDT