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

RE: Technical change to the RDFS MT (test cases in n3)

From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 12:18:39 +0200
To: jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Cc: "pat hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF24A4AEAC.907EC8EF-ONC1256C3D.0036CDFE-C1256C3D.0038A58A@agfa.be>


I've tested those 2 testcases and had a proof found
after adding following 2 closure rules

--------------------------------------------------------
        | IF                       |  THEN
--------------------------------------------------------
:rule11 | ?A rdfs:subClassOf ?B .  |
        | ?p rdfs:domain ?A .      | ?p rdfs:domain ?B .
--------------------------------------------------------
:rule12 | ?A rdfs:subClassOf ?B .  |
        | ?p rdfs:range ?A .       | ?p rdfs:range ?B .
--------------------------------------------------------


-- ,
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/


                                                                                                                                        
                      "Jeremy Carroll"                                                                                                  
                      <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.c        To:       "pat hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>                      
                      om>                       cc:                                                                                     
                      Sent by:                  Subject:  RE: Technical change to the RDFS MT (test cases in n3)                        
                      w3c-rdfcore-wg-req                                                                                                
                      uest@w3.org                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                        
                      2002-09-23 09:52                                                                                                  
                      AM                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                        







Domain & range test case, in n3, will RDF/XML latter.

1:[[

eg:prop rdfs:range eg:A .
eg:A rdfs:subClassOf eg:B .

rdfs-entails

eg:prop rdfs:range eg:B .
]]

(i.e. in english,
every object of a eg:prop is an eg:A.
every eg:A is an eg:B,
thus
every object of an eg:prop is an eg:B).

Similarly

2: [[
eg:prop rdfs:domain eg:A .
eg:A rdfs:subClassOf eg:B .

rdfs-entails

eg:prop rdfs:domain eg:B .
]]


As Jan says, maybe we have misspelt rdfs:subSetOf.

If we don't have this, Peter has to work harder anyway; and doing it four
times over is about the same as doing it once. So if Pat is changing his
mind on these ones, I would tend to want to leave the subClassOf ones alone
too.

Jeremy
Received on Monday, 23 September 2002 06:19:21 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:51:02 EDT