W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > August 2002

Re: Layering LX (or FOL) on RDF

From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:34:27 -0700
Message-ID: <015201c24e19$e9441fa0$657ba8c0@c1457248a.sttls1.wa.home.com>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>

From: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>

re: http://robustai.net/mentography/negation_paradox.gif

> > Within one document, all the arrows are triples.  To express multiple
> > formula, we need to use multiple RDF documents.
>
> How can your ``arrows'' be triples, they have three ends!

Sorry, that's just a shortcut notation.  I think I listed most of the
shortcuts in
http://robustai.net/mentography/MentographySemenglish.gif

> > Yes, I agree.  <http://robustai.net/sailor/paradox.rdf> is a paradox and
> > should be excluded from all graphs that purports to be binarialy
logical.
>
> But how can you do this exclusion within RDF?

Wasn't that what Sandro was trying to do?   But as far as I know, RDF/XML is
just just a syntax with an extremely small vocabulary of constant terms.  I
dont know how to do any exclusion at all unless we get enough terms to write
rules.

Why must we do this exclusion within the small vocabulary of RDF ?

... confused as always ...

Seth Russell
http://robustai.net/sailor/
Received on Tuesday, 27 August 2002 18:35:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:55 GMT