W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > July 2002

Re: Paradoxes are bugs on the SW was: Re: questions on assertion

From: Giles Hogben <giles.hogben@jrc.it>
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 16:56:08 +0200
Message-ID: <022801c22758$c203cef0$162abf8b@pcdsa22>
To: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@openhealth.org>, <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>

OK - so can you explain this para?

The idea of "unasserted triples" allows a "higher level" language to define
the truth value for such triples according to its own rules (i.e. model


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@openhealth.org>
To: "Giles Hogben" <giles.hogben@jrc.it>; "Joshua Allen"
<joshuaa@microsoft.com>; <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 4:26 PM
Subject: Re: Paradoxes are bugs on the SW was: Re: questions on assertion

> Giles Hogben wrote:
> >
> > So what is the meaning of assertion in RDF? If triples are, as you say,
> > unasserted, what is the meaning of
> >
> > "This document describes a model theory for RDF(S) which treats the
> language
> > as simple assertional language, in which each triple makes a distinct
> > assertion and the meaning of any triple is not changed by adding other
> > triples"
> >
> I did not say that triples are unasserted according to RDF, to the
> I said that in order to solve some of the broader issues that Joshua
> languages or layers that are (in some sense) built on RDF may need to use
> RDF triples as _syntax_ to which the model theory of such a language
> provides its own semantics.
> Jonathan
Received on Tuesday, 9 July 2002 10:51:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 2 March 2016 11:10:38 UTC