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

Re: proposed test of RDFS entailment rules

From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 12:55:21 -0500
Message-Id: <p06001f31bba89318c04b@[10.0.100.25]>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org

>I propose that the following be a positive entailment test in the RDF test
>suite.  This is a valid RDFS entailment (modulo typing errors), but is not
>a consequence of the current RDFS entailment rules.

I have no objection to this being a test case. It illustrates the 
observation in the Semantics document (section 4.3, RDFS Entailment) 
that an inconsistent graph validly entails any RDF graph; the fact 
that this is not a consequence of the RDFS rules illustrates the 
remark made there to the effect that such 'trivial entailments' are 
not useful inferences to draw in practice.

BTW, reading this made me notice an editing slip in the statement of 
the RDFS lemma in the proof appendix, now fixed; I have also added a 
1-paragraph disclaimer where the lemma is first stated pointing out 
that it does not cover this kind of case and what would be needed to 
make it do so.

Pat


>Premise
>
><http://example.org/prop> 
><http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#range> 
><http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#XMLLiteral> .
><http://example.org/foo> <http://example.org/prop> 
>"<"^^<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#XMLLiteral> .
>
>Conclusion
>
><http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> 
><http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> 
><http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> .
>
>
>Peter F. Patel-Schneider


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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, 7 October 2003 14:01:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:33 GMT