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

Re: [closed] pfps-05

From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 14:23:41 +0200
To: pfps@research.bell-labs.com
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, w3c-rdfcore-wg-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF95039644.DDD1C3D3-ONC1256D36.0041CADC-C1256D36.00441645@agfa.be>


Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> From: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
> Subject: Re: [closed] pfps-05
> Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 13:21:49 +0200
>
> >
> > [removed www-rdf-comments from the cc and added w3c-rdfcore-wg]
> >
> > > For example, I am currently unable to determine whether the following
> > > entailment
> > >
> > >      ex:foo ex:prop "a"^^foo:bar  .
> > >
> > >          entails
> > >
> > >      ex:foo ex:prop _:x  .
> > >      _:x rdf:type rdfs:Resource .
> >
> > Using appropriate namespace prefixes
> >
> > @prefix ex: <http://example.org/ex#>.
> > @prefix foo: <http://example.org/foo#>.
> >
> > I have found that entailment working
> >
> > ex:foo ex:prop "a"^^foo:bar.
> > "a"^^foo:bar rdf:type rdfs:Resource.
> >
> > --
> > Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
>
> I am *not* asking whether some piece of software produces the result.  I
am
> instead asking whether an entailment holds.

That's right.
Pat, looking into
[[
RDF Semantics
@@Editors Draft 18 May 2003

@@Based on Last Call Draft at:
    http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-rdf-mt-20030123/
]]
http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/users/phayes/RDF_Semantics_Editors.html

I think that
rdfs4b    xxx aaa uuu .       uuu rdf:type rdfs:Resource .
should be extended to
rdfs4b    xxx aaa yyy .       yyy rdf:type rdfs:Resource .

--
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Friday, 30 May 2003 08:23:57 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:57:34 EDT