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

Re: RDF list semantics

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 17:58:44 +0330
Message-Id: <p05111b02b9cc8f56683d@[65.217.30.172]>
To: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

>Reading the message (below) that DanBri forwarded to rdf-comments 
>brought to mind two questions:
>
>1. Is there some background/conceptual discussion of RDF lists that 
>would be usefully addressed in the Concepts document?
>
>2. In discussing the semantics of lists, I understand Pat's proposed 
>semantics to assume the existence of *all* possible lists.  Which 
>leads me to suspect undesired entailments; e.g.
>
>    my:List my:threeFavouriteThings _:x .
>    _:x rdf:first "mostFavourite" .
>    _:x rdf:rest  _:x2 .
>    _:x2 rdf:first "nextFavourite" .
>    _:x2 rdf:rest  _:x3 .
>    _:x3 rdf:first "thirdFavourite" .
>    _:x3 rdf:rest  rdf:nil .
>
>entails:
>
>    my:List my:threeFavouriteThings _:y .
>    _:y rdf:first "mostFavourite" .
>    _:y rdf:rest  _:y2 .
>    _:y2 rdf:first "thirdFavourite" .
>    _:y2 rdf:rest  _:y3 .
>    _:y3 rdf:first "nextFavourite" .
>    _:y3 rdf:rest  rdf:nil .

No, the entailment would only be to the *existence* of that reordered 
list. But the two lists are still distinct, so one of them being 
yourFavoriteThings doesn't entail that the other must be.

Pat
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Received on Friday, 11 October 2002 10:27:59 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:52:24 EDT