W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > July 2003

Re: Cut back RDFCore semantics doc

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 20:30:48 +0100
Message-ID: <3F0332E8.3080304@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
CC: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org


Looking at the latest editors draft.

Jeremy:

>>
>> That version suffers the following defects vis-a-vis simple completeness
>>
>> <eg:a> <eg:b> <eg:a> .
>>
>> entails
>>
>> _:a <eg:b> _:b .
>>
>> but this cannot be shown.
>>
>> Similarly
>>
>> _:a <eg:b> _:a .
>>
>> entails
>>
>> _:a <eg:b> _:b .
>>
>>
>> but this cannot be shown.


Pat:

> 
> 
> Right, it doesnt claim to be complete for simple entailment, only a 
> complete rendering down of vocabulary entailment to simple entailment. 
> To check simple entailment you have to refer to the relevant section and 
> it tells you to use the interpolation lemma.
> 


Why do you prefer the wording in the editors draft over the wording in

>>
>> However your wording in msg
>>
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003AprJun/0202
>>
>> is, I believe, satisfactory.
>>




Although I agree your statements of the RDF RDFS entailment lemmas is 
robust against this issue.


Jeremy
Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2003 15:31:47 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:58:41 EDT