W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > January 2003

RE: AS & S review: RDFS-compatible OWL semantics

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 10:48:29 +0100
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, <herman.ter.horst@philips.com>
Cc: <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BHEGLCKMOHGLGNOKPGHDIEPMCAAA.jjc@hpl.hp.com>



[ big snip ]
Herman:
> >
> > As I explained above, ICEXT is defined in terms of CI,
> > so CI is more fundamental than ICEXT and the
> > expression CEXTI(I(rdfs:Class)).
>
Peter:
> The LCC version of RDF Semantics says
>
> 	x isin in ICEXT(y) iff <x,y> is in IEXT(I(rdf:type))
> 	IC = ICEXT(I(rdfs:Class))
>
> This looks to me as if IC is subordinate to ICEXT.
>

I've not followed this thread, but on this point I think I can chip in that
I am pretty sure that the RDF Core WG intent is that IC is subordinate to
ICEXT (as Peter reads). If this is not clear (as Herman reads) in the
semantics doc, please submit this as a last call editorial comment.
Alternatively, if you think that is a misguided intent then it would be
possible to submit (a somewhat less welcome) potentially substantive
comment.

Jeremy
Received on Thursday, 23 January 2003 04:48:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:57 GMT