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

Re: LC2 semantics proof appendix

From: <herman.ter.horst@philips.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 13:36:14 +0200
To: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Cc: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFE9C0A9BD.C370C622-ONC1256DBB.003EBB2C-C1256DBB.003FD437@diamond.philips.com>

>Adding these URIs to IP ...
>is harmless for the other (elementary) Herbrand 
>results, so I have restored this condition. 

I do not believe that this is harmless for the Herbrand lemma,
in particular the only if side:
If I satisfies G then H(G) << I

In order to prove this only if statement, some mapping 
  A : blank(G) -> IRI
is chosen such that I+A satisfies G.
Then, k : IRH u IPH -> IRI u IPI is defined to be the
restriction of I+A to IRH u IPH.
For a URI v such that 
  v type Property 
is in G but with v not being the property of a triple in G,
the proof that k(v) is in IPI seems to need the first condition
on RDF interpretations.
However, I is an arbitrary simple interpretation.

Herman
Received on Friday, 10 October 2003 07:37:18 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Friday, 10 October 2003 07:37:22 EDT