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

Re: Action needed: subClassOf on datatypes

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 09:44:13 +0100
Message-ID: <3F54585D.1000209@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>


Summary:
Prefer c++
modify  the test case to say that the case is D-consistent with the
empty graph, not that it is D-entailed by it;
add D-inconsistent test using a different rdfs:subClassOf triple between 
xsd datatypes.




pat hayes wrote:


> (a) modify the test case doc by deleting the test case;

Not particularly OK, well unless the semantics doc discusses 
rdfs:subClassOf in datatyping clearly. i.e. this should not be left as an 
exercise for the reader.

> (b) modify the test case to say that this only follows under the 
> strengthened extensional semantic conditions on rdfs:subClassOf 
> described in section 4.1 of the semantics document;

not good

> (c) modify  the test case to say that the case is D-consistent with the 
> empty graph, not that it is D-entailed by it;

OK
Also add a test case showing that
xsd:string rdfs:subClassOf xsd:integer .
is inconsistent.

> (d) modify the semantics of D-interpretations to insist that datatype 
> class subsetting *is* treated extensionally, so that the rule rdfD4 is 
> valid and the test case is OK. This can be done by adding the following 
> semantic condition on D-interpretations:

Prefer (c) to this.
(Another option is to explicitly list rdfs:subClassOf relationships between 
xsd datatypes as true by fiat).

Jeremy
Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2003 04:45:17 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:59:51 EDT