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

Re: refining closure text for rdfs-isDefinedBy-semantics

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 16:32:42 -0400 (EDT)
To: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
cc: patrick hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0206121632250.14026-100000@tux.w3.org>


Which is one of several reasons I wish it were just called rdfs:namespace :(

dan

On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Frank Manola wrote:

>
> Pat--
>
> How about some suggestions for what we ought to mean by "define"?
> Especially since it's hard to avoid the use of "define" when trying to
> describe "isDefinedBy".
>
> --Frank
>
> patrick hayes wrote:
> >
> > >On 2002-06-11 10:29, "ext Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>  On 2002-06-10 19:01, "ext Eric Miller" <em@w3.org> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>  Now that i'm back online, I see Patrick's suggestion...
> > >>>
> > >>>  On Fri, 2002-06-07 at 11:15, Patrick Stickler wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>>  My specific recommendations are:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>  1. Leave the definition of rdfs:isDefinedBy as is, though removing
> > >>>>  the incorrect language about namespaces, allowing any instance
> > >>>>  of rdf:Resource and multiple statements.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>  2. Qualify objects of rdfs:isDefinedBy by class, in the case of
> > >>>>  RDF/XML instances, by the proposed rdfs:Schema class. This permits
> > >>>>  those who want/need to, to be explicit about the nature of the
> > >>>>  defining resource.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>  3. Clearly state that there is no functional relationship between
> > >>>>  the URI of a term and the namespace URI used in its RDF/XML
> > >>>>  serialization -- that the RDF model is based on URIs, not
> > >>>>  qnames, and as such, namespaces have no significance whatsoever.
> > >>>
> > >>>  yep, i believe we're saying similar things.
> > >>>
> > >>>  Patrick, have you taken a crack at this rewording?
> > >>
> > >>  Not yet, but I would be happy to do so prior to Friday's telecon.
> > >
> > >Here goes:
> > >
> > ><rdfs:Property rdf:about="&rdfs;isDefinedBy">
> > >    <rdfs:subPropertyOf rdf:resource="&rdfs;seeAlso"/>
> > >    <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="&rdf;Resource"/>
> > >    <rdfs:range rdf:resource="&rdf;Resource"/>
> > >    <rdfs:comment>
> > >        This property indicates a resource which fully or partially
> > >        defines the subject resource.
> >
> > I insist that we do not put this into a spec unless we also say
> > something about what we mean by 'define'. That word has no formal
> > meaning in an assertional language like RDF and RDFS, and it is a
> > very dangerous word to use casually. (For example, the difference
> > between a simple contradiction and a very nasty paradox turns on the
> > distinction between 'assert' and 'define', and this has been a
> > central issue in the Webont layering problems.). I would prefer to
> > avoid the use of the 'define' word altogether if we possibly can,
> > particularly when used with 'resource'.
> >
> > >The subject of this property
> > >        can be any instance of rdfs:Resource and may have as its
> > >        value any rdfs:Resource.
> >
> > Why bother saying that? *Everything* is an instance of rdfs:Resource,
> > so this isn't saying anything.
> >
> > >The most common anticipated usage
> > >        is to relate a vocabulary term to an instance of rdfs:Schema
> > >        containing defining information about that term.
> > >    </rdfs:comment>
> > ></rdfs:Property>
> > >
> > ><rdfs:Class rdf:about="&rdfs;Schema">
> > >    <rdfs:comment>
> > >       An RDF/XML instance.
> > >    </rdfs:comment>
> > ></rdf:Class>
> > >
> > >(and no, I don't consider the definition of rdfs:Schema to be
> > >  too narrow; folks can still point to N3 instances if they like,
> > >  but an rdfs:Schema is a standard serialization of RDF statements)
> > >
> > >Cheers,
> > >
> > >Patrick
> > >
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2002 16:32:45 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:49:14 EDT