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

Re: Converting SHOE to RDF: about 2/3 done; some gotchas

From: Graham Klyne <GK@Dial.pipex.com>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 21:08:03 +0100
Message-Id: <4.3.1.2.20000522210410.00a81530@pop.dial.pipex.com>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
At 12:26 AM 5/14/00 -0500, Dan Connolly wrote:
>Hmm... I'm not sure what you mean by "full semantic understanding."
>RDF has no built-in logic whatsoever. The "full semantic understanding"
>depends on more than just the availability of various things...
>it depends on what inference rules you choose to use, what
>sort of logic, etc.

A question, if I may...

I have seen two kinds of statement made about logic in RDF:

(a) RDF has logical conjunction (multiple predicates of a subject generally 
taken to be parts of a conjunction)

(b) RDF has no built-in logic (as you say above)

Are there differing views, or am I missing something?

#g


------------
Graham Klyne
(GK@ACM.ORG)
Received on Tuesday, 23 May 2000 05:24:05 GMT

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