- From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 16:38:57 -0500
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
>>I believe that the rules for rdfs entailments are still incomplete in the >>current version of RDF Semantics (Editors [sic] Draft July 27). >> >>For example, consider the RDF graph >> >> ex:foo ex:bar "<"^^rdf:XMLLiteral . >> ex:bar rdfs:range rdf:XMLLiteral . >> >>I believe that this graph has no rdfs-intepretations > >Yes, you are right. I had overlooked this case; and the proof >implicitly assumes that XML literals are wellformed. > >I will modify the statement of the RDFS entailment lemma so as to >exclude such cases, by requiring the antecedent to be consistent. I >will also add explanatory text to section 5, which has a paragraph >which curently ends: >"An ill-typed literal does not in itself constitute an >inconsistency, but a graph which entails that an ill-typed literal >has rdf:type rdfs:Literal would be inconsistent." > >to be modified to: > >"An ill-typed literal does not in itself constitute an >inconsistency, but a graph which entails that an ill-typed literal >has rdf:type rdfs:Literal, or that an ill-typed XML literal has >rdf:type rdf:XMLLiteral, would be inconsistent." I have also made a few other additions to the text in various places to draw attention to this, eg a brief mention and warning about trivial entailments in section 4.3. They can be traced from the change log in http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes/RDF_Semant_Edit_Central.html 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 Saturday, 2 August 2003 17:59:15 UTC