W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > April to June 2002

Re: need to determine what RDF is

From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 13:38:01 -0700
Message-ID: <017701c20819$e564fa80$657ba8c0@c1457248a.sttls1.wa.home.com>
To: "patrick hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Cc: <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>


I still fail to see why it is important for us to classify entailments. It's
just going to over complicate stuff needlessly.  If my agent knows the rules
for rdfs:subClass, than it can arrive at legitimate entailments,


There is no universal overriding notion of 'legitimate' entailment,  is why.
I agree it complicates things, but I see no way around the  fact that life
is complicated.


Life is complicated, agreed.  Consider the graph:

<ex:Jane> <rdf:type> <ex:Woman>.
<ex:Woman> <rdfs:subClassOf> <ex:Human>.
<rdfs:subClassOf> <rdfs:comment>  "Indicates membership of a class".
<rdfs:subClassOf> <ex:rule>  "(=> (subClass ?SUBCLASS ?CLASS) (forall
(?INST)   (=> (rdf:type ?INST ?SUBCLASS) (rdf:type ?INST ?CLASS))))".

Given that graph, do you agree that some agent could calucate that
"<ex:Jane> <rdf:type> <ex:Human>."   ??

If so, then what kind of entailment is that, RDF, or RDFS, or is it EX, or
is it RDF+EX+RDFS ?  What are we to use that classification for?    In other
words what is the actual utility of that kind of thinking?

.... I think I'm gonna keep asking that question untill I get an answer.

Seth Russell
Received on Thursday, 30 May 2002 16:44:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:15:18 UTC