W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > May 2000

Re: Transforming RDF with XSLT

From: <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 12:38:26 +0200
To: " - *www-rdf-interest@w3.org" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-Id: <0006800023838822000002L022*@MHS>
Dan Connolly wrote:
> Somebody suggested more people might be interested in this
> hack, so I wrote a little explanation, and here you go...
>
> =========
> Transforming RDF with XSLT
> http://www.w3.org/XML/2000/04rdf-parse/

Thanks and we are happy to join these ideas!
Compared with Eric's parser we are actually missing some arc's in our
(silly) example at ftp://windsor.agfa.be/outgoing/RCEI/NET/euler/authen.rdf
What's wrong here?

> There are quite a few other RDF/prolog hacks in the RDF interest group)
> lately, though I'd rather avoid the closed-world assumption ala Algernon
> and access-limited logic.
> Also, a representation for proofs is an important layer (see Edinborough
> Logical Framework (larch trait))

RDF is an _external_ description means (namespaced predicates are
making a really big difference).
An RDF based rule (such as the ones used in Euler) is basically a shorthand for
a set of (implied) RDF statements. This is of course a constrained view of the
world, but that is also the case when you make these statements by hand.
The difference (with handwriting) should be made clear via a proof trace
which can then be  validated.
In what sense is closed-world assumption an issue?

Best regards,
Jos De Roo --- AGFA
Received on Wednesday, 3 May 2000 06:38:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:43 GMT