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

resolving some semantics issues

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 16:45:29 -0500
Message-Id: <p05210645bae8494733ac@[10.0.100.5]>
To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Cc: Brian_McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
re. issue pfps-01, I propose that we accept it, and note that it has 
been addressed by the following text (between **-**):
The datatype map which also contains the set of all pairs of the form
< http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#sss , sss>, where sss is a built-in
datatype **which has well-defined lexical and value spaces and a
lexical-to-value mapping and** is named sss in XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes
[XML-SCHEMA2], eg decimal, string, is referred to here as XSD.
]]

re. issue pfps-03, I propose that we not accept it and note that the 
purpose of the appendix is informative (for a certain class of 
readers) rather than definitive. The document states:

"The editor believes that both of these descriptions, and also the closure
rules described in section 4, are all in exact correspondence, but only the
directly described model theory in sections 1- 3 should be taken as
normative."

re. issue pfps-05, I propose that we accept it and note that it is 
addressed by rule rdfs1 in section 4.2 of the editor's draft.

(Jeremy, the cases you mention
rdfs:Literal rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:Resource
rdfs:Class rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:Resource
follow from the range constraints on subClassOf, which require 
rdfs:Literal and rdfs:Class both to be of type class, then rule 
rdfs7a.)

re. issue pfps-09, I propose that we accept it and address it with 
the text in section 3.4 of the editor's draft, viz.
"RDF provides for the use of externally defined datatypes identified by a
particular URIref.
...
Formally, let D be a set of pairs consisting of a URIref and a datatype such
that no URIref appears twice in the set, so that D can be regarded as a
function from a set of URIrefs to a set of datatypes: call this a datatype
map."


re. issue horst-01, I propose that we accept it and address it by 
reference to the rule rdfs12 in the current editor's draft, together 
with a note that the proof of the rdfs entailment lemma will discuss 
issues arising in the subsequent email trail following this comment, 
with details to be given in a later response.

Pat
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC					(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   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
s.pam@ai.uwf.edu   for spam
Received on Wednesday, 14 May 2003 17:45:39 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:57:31 EDT