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

pfps-25 schema semantics

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 11:23:01 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20030524104522.041253e0@localhost>
To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, pfps@research.bell-labs.com, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

Pat, Peter,

I think the Schema Doc and the semantics doc are now in sync on these so 
I'm proposing a formal motion to close below.  Please let us know if 
there's a problem I missed.

------------

RDFCore,

Sitting together, Danbri and I have been reviewing issue

   http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-25

that concerns a number of discrepancies between the schema doc and the 
semantics doc.

The first point is:

[[
- Schema states ``Each instance of rdfs:Datatype is a subclass of
   rdfs:Literal'', but this is only a consequence of D-interpretations, not
   RDFS-interpretations.
]]

The current editors draft of the semantics doc

   http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-mt-20030117/#rdfs_interp

now says that this relationship is a consequence of RDFS - 
interpretations.  Pat please can you confirm this.

[[
- Schema states ``rdf:XMLLiteral is an instance of rdfs:Datatype and a
   subclass of rdfs:Literal''.   The second part of this is not even a
   consequence of D-interpretations.
]]

These assertions are now also included in RDFS interpretations as stated in 
the editors draft of the semantics doc:

   http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-mt-20030117/#rdfs_interp

Pat - confirm?

[[
- Schema states
	``The rdfs:domain of rdf:type is rdfs:Resource.''
	``The rdfs:domain of rdfs:label is rdfs:Resource.''
	``The rdfs:domain of rdfs:comment is rdfs:Resource.''
	``The rdfs:domain of rdfs:comment is rdfs:Resource.''
	``The rdfs:domain of rdfs:member is rdfs:Resource.''   @@@@@@
	``The rdfs:range of rdfs:member is rdfs:Resource.''
	``The rdfs:range of rdfs:first is rdfs:Resource.''
	``The rdfs:range of rdf:subject is rdfs:Resource.''
	``The rdfs:range of rdf:resource is rdf:Property.''
I presume Peter meant the range of rdf:Predicate is rdf:Property
	``The rdfs:range of rdf:object is rdfs:Resource.''
	``The rdfs:domain of rdfs:seeAlso is rdfs:Resource.''
	``The rdfs:range of rdfs:seeAlso is rdfs:Resource.''
	``The rdfs:domain of rdfs:isDefinedBy is rdfs:Resource.''
	``The rdfs:range of rdfs:isDefinedBy is rdfs:Resource.''
	``The rdfs:domain of rdfs:value is rdfs:Resource.''
	``The rdfs:range of rdfs:value is rdfs:Resource.''
   but none of these are consequences of RDFS-interpretations.  (Well,
   actually Semantics is vague about most of these, as there is a vague
   addendum to the conditions on RDFS-interpretations that indicates that
   some domain and range assertions ``may be taken to be rdfs:Resource''.
   In my view this vagueness is inappropriate for the definition of
   RDFS-interpretations.)
]]

Semantics is no longer vague about these.  It specifies them as above, 
except that the one marked @@@@@ is incorrectly stated.

Propose:

   1) modify the semantics document to state that the rdfs:domain of 
rdfs:member is rdfs:Resource.
   2) that the current semantics editors WD, modified as per 1) addresses 
this comment

Brian
Received on Saturday, 24 May 2003 06:43:11 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:57:33 EDT