- From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 13:19:25 -0500
- To: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>[is redirected from rdf-comments to rdf-core]
>
>Pat - that * suggestion is actually a very good one.
>I've done a small test (just this particular case but
>it could be generalized to all XML clashes and
>maybe also other datatype clashes, but then we
>need a bit more time to write code to invoke
>XML parsers and/or datatype checkers).
>The results are reflected in following proof
>
>[[
>@prefix iw: <http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/software/IW/spec/iw#>.
>@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>.
>@prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#>.
>@prefix eg: <http://example.org/eg#>.
> {
> <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/rdfs-rules#rdfs9>.
> {[iw:Variable "?A"] = rdf:XMLLiteral.
> [iw:Variable "?B"] = rdfs:Literal.
> [iw:Variable "?A"] rdfs:subClassOf [iw:Variable "?B"]} =>
> {rdf:XMLLiteral rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:Literal}.
> {
> <http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/rdfs-rules#rdfs3>.
> {[iw:Variable "?P"] = eg:prop.
> [iw:Variable "?C"] = rdf:XMLLiteral.
> [iw:Variable "?P"] rdfs:range [iw:Variable "?C"]} =>
> {eg:prop rdfs:range rdf:XMLLiteral}.
> {[iw:Variable "?S"] = eg:foo.
> [iw:Variable "?P"] = eg:prop.
> [iw:Variable "?O*"] = "<"^^rdf:XMLLiteral.
> [iw:Variable "?S"] [iw:Variable "?P"] [iw:Variable "?O*"]} =>
> {eg:foo eg:prop "<"^^rdf:XMLLiteral}.
> [iw:Variable "?S*"] = "<"^^rdf:XMLLiteral.
> [iw:Variable "?A"] = rdf:XMLLiteral.
> [iw:Variable "?S*"] a [iw:Variable "?A"]} =>
> {"<"^^rdf:XMLLiteral a rdf:XMLLiteral}.
> [iw:Variable "_:Y_3*"] = "<"^^rdf:XMLLiteral.
> [iw:Variable "_:Y_3*"] a rdfs:Literal} =>
>{"<"^^rdf:XMLLiteral a rdfs:Literal}.
>]]
>
>in which you should see 6 occurences of *'ed variables
>and an appropriate proof checker is informed that way.
>
>Till now, I made separate rules to derive inconsistencies
>but maybe this way is better; any further thoughts??
I think this way works fine and should extend to
datatype clashes in a uniform way, though the
derivations there will require datataype savvies
of course.
The archetype datatype contradiction would be something of the form
"literalForm"^^ex:datatype a ex:otherDatatype
where the "LiteralForm" cannot denote something
in the value space of ex:otherDatatype (for any
number of reasons, the most obvious being that it
is illtyped for ex:datatype, but in particular
cases it could include things like
"0.3"^^xsd:real a xsd:integer .
where the literal is well-typed in itself, so is
a kosher rdfs:Literal, but is an 'illegal'
value for the target datatype.
I think this is the most general case possible in
RDFS+D, but I havn't worked it out in full
detail. In OWL you can get other datatype
contradictions, eg by defining a subclass of
xsd:boolean with three distinct things in it.
Pat
>
>--
>Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
>
>
>
>
> pat
>hayes
> <phayes@ihmc.us>
>To: Jos
>De_Roo/AMDUS/MOR/Agfa-NV/BE/BAYER@AGFA
> Sent by:
>cc: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider"
><pfps@research.bell-labs.com>,
> www-rdf-comments-req
>www-rdf-comments@w3.org,
>www-rdf-comments-request@w3.org
> uest@w3.org
>Subject: Re: entailment-from-inconsistent-graph
>[was: proposed test of RDFS
>
>entailment
>rules]
>
>
> 2003-10-18 03:18
>PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>The current (editor's draft) RDFS rules have a
>criterion for detecting inconsistency, to wit,
>the derivation of a triple called an 'XML clash'.
>
>_:nnn rdf:type rdfs:Literal .
>
>where the subject bnode _:nnn was introduced, and
>allocated to an ill-typed literal by, the lg
>generalization rule (formerly called rdf2). The
>derivation for this example is as follows:
>
><http://example.org/prop>
><http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#range>
><http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#XMLLiteral>
>.
>
><http://example.org/foo>
><http://example.org/prop>
>"<"^^<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#XMLLiteral>
>.
>
><http://example.org/foo>
><http://example.org/prop> _:1*. rule lg,
>with _:1* allocated to
>"<"^^<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#XMLLiteral>,
>which is ill-typed. (Jos, can your code keep
>track of this when the rule is applied and 'mark'
>the bnode accordingly?)
>
>_:1*
><http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
><http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#XMLLiteral> . rule rdfs3
>
><http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#XMLLiteral>
><http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#subClassOf>
><http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Literal> .
>RDFS axiomatic triple
>
>_:1* <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
><http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Literal> . rule rdfs9
>
>So the 'ex cont quod' could reasonably be
>restricted to this case, ie if you really believe
>an XML clash then you will believe anything.
>However, notice that the clash itself is not
>inconsistent: it is a symptom of the original set
>being inconsistent. So it would not be correct to
>say that the silly conclusion is entailed by the
>clash; rather, if you can derive a clash from a
>graph, then the silly conclusion is entailed by
>your original graph.
>
>>What a coincidence - while sitting in a plane this evening
>>I did't think to implement a "ex contradictione quodlibet".
>>The premise graphs are assumed to be the case unless they
>>can be proven to be inconsistent and then we just say so
>>and don't explicitly use them further. So we can't
>>run that testcase.
>
>I think it would be OK to be able to prove the
>antecedent inconsistent, and call that a proper
>run of the test-case. I think that was Peter's
>main point.
>
>Pat
>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>> Brian
>>McBride
>
>> <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com
>>To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider"
>><pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
>> >
>>cc:
>>www-rdf-comments@w3.org
>
>> Sent by:
>>Subject: entailment-from-inconsistent-graph
>>[was: proposed test of RDFS entailment
>> www-rdf-comments-req
>>rules]
>
>>
>>uest@w3.org
>
>>
>>
>
>>
>>
>
>> 2003-10-15 03:37
>>PM
>
>>
>>
>
>>
>>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Peter,
>>
>>The WG were unable to discuss this suggestion before publishing the 2nd
>>last call documents. I propose to track this as a 2nd last call comment:
>>
>>http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20031010-comments/#entailment-from-inconsistent-graph
>
>>
>>
>>Brian
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>>> I propose that the following be a positive entailment test in the RDF
>>test
>>> suite. This is a valid RDFS entailment (modulo typing errors), but is
>>not
>>> a consequence of the current RDFS entailment rules.
>>>
>>> Premise
>>>
>> > <http://example.org/prop> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#range>
><
>>http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#XMLLiteral> .
>>> <http://example.org/foo> <http://example.org/prop> "<"^^<
>>http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#XMLLiteral> .
>> >
>>> Conclusion
>>>
>>> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <
>>http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <
> >http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> .
>>>
>>>
>>> Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>
>
>--
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>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@ihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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@ihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Monday, 27 October 2003 13:19:39 UTC