W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > April to June 2003

Re: incompleteness of rdf-closure

From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 10:26:43 -0500
Message-Id: <p05210601bb0ba89d50f4@[10.0.100.24]>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org

>From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
>Subject: Re: incompleteness of rdf-closure
>Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 11:33:07 -0500
>
>>  >The RDF entailment lemma is still not valid in the 6 June 2003 version of
>>  >RDF semantics.
>>
>>  That might well be the case: I have not yet checked the proof in
>>  detail after the many editorial changes.
>>
>>  >
>>  >For example, the empty RDF graph rdf-entails
>>  >	rdf:subject rdf:type rdf:Property .
>>  >but this is not part of the rdf-closure of the empty RDF graph.
>>
>>  It is:
>>
>>  rdf:subject rdfs:range rdfs:Resource . (rdfs axiom)
>>  rdfs:range rdfs:domain rdf:Property .  (rdfs axiom)
>>  rdf:subject rdf:type rdf:Property .  (rdfs2)
>
>I don't understand how two rdfs axioms and an rdfs rule can be used in the
>determination of a rdf-closure.

Ah, I hadnt noticed that subtlety. You have a point, indeed. I will 
think about that some more and get back to you. I have been inclining 
for some towards giving up on RDF (as opposed to RDFS) closures in 
any case.

Pat


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Tuesday, 10 June 2003 11:26:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:32 GMT