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

request for feedback on domain and range semantics.

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 12:08:55 -0500
Message-Id: <p05111b02b9df265cd5f5@[]>
To: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>, pfps@research.bell-labs.com, jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com

(BCCd to three WGs to avoid cross-postings in replies)

I am hereby seeking feedback in order to help me make a decision. As 
editor of the RDF MT document, I have discretion to decide whether 
rdfs:range and rdfs:domain should have 'IF' or "IFF" semantics.  What 
turns on this, in case anyone hasn't been following, is whether 
('iff') or not ('if') the following inference should be considered 

P rdfs:range A .
A rdfs:subClassOf B .
P rdfs:range B .

I have argued for the utility of disallowing this entailment, and 
several people have agreed; but there also seems to be a widespread 
feeling that the entailment is intuitively 'reasonable'. Moreover, 
several people have noted a preference for having a uniform rule one 
way or the other, and I think it is essential that we give subClassOf 
and subPropertyOf an 'iff' semantics. On the other hand, the 'if' 
alternative makes life a little easier for inference engines.

So far, all the arguments I have heard, including my own, are 
basically aesthetic. My request is, does anyone have a "can't live 
with" technical objection to either alternative? If so please send me 
an email in the next few days.  Thanks.

Pat Hayes
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, 25 October 2002 13:09:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:54:01 UTC