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

RDF Concepts and formal inference paths ?

From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 06:53:03 -0700
Message-ID: <3DB0123F.4090906@robustai.net>
To: "www-rdf-comments@w3.org" <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>, Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>

RE  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2002Oct/0048.html
Where it is written that:
[[
To emphasize this, suppose that B had failed to use rdfs:subClassOf and 
instead had tried to use his own term:
B:Comic B:oneOfThem  <http://insult.com/lexicon#Clown> .
B:oneOfThem rdfs:comment "This means the same as rdfs:subClassOf" .
then in spite of the clear social meaning of the comment, there would be 
no formal inference path from this, taken with the A and C publications, 
to anything that could be found insulting; so even if C had intended to 
bad-mouth the person C:JohnSmith, B's stupidity would have thwarted him.
]]

Shouldn't that read that there is no formal inference path *sanctioned 
by the RDF Model theory* from this, ....

We certainly can make our inference path be any formal rules we choose. 
 Our inference engine could follow the rules for B:oneOfThem just as 
easily as it could follow the  rules for rdfs:subClassOf and the 
inferences will be just as formal.  The only variable is  that we cannot 
claim endorsement of that formality from the W3C Model Theory. 

... just my humble opinion.

Seth Russell
Received on Friday, 18 October 2002 09:53:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:31 GMT