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

S&AS: Treatment of imports in RDF-Compatible Semantics

From: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 14:48:11 -0400
Message-ID: <3EC926EB.9471C823@cse.lehigh.edu>
To: pfps@research.bell-labs.com, WebOnt <www-webont-wg@w3.org>

Hi Peter,

I was composing a response to Dave Becket on the imports issue, when I
noticed a problem with imports in the RDF-Compatible Semantics. In
section 5.3, you define the term "imports closed" but then never use it.

I believe you need to change the last definition in the section from:

"Definitions: Let K and Q be collections of RDF graphs. Then K OWL Full
entails Q whenever every OWL Full interpretation (of any vocabulary V
that includes the RDF and RDFS vocabularies and the OWL vocabulary that
satisfies all the RDF graphs in K also satisfies all the RDF graphs in
Q. K is OWL     Full consistent if there is some OWL Full interpretation
that satisfies all the RDF graphs in K."

to something like:

"Definitions: Let K and Q be collections of RDF graphs. Then K OWL Full
entails Q whenever every OWL Full interpretation (of any vocabulary V
that includes the RDF and RDFS vocabularies and the OWL vocabulary) that
satisfies all the RDF graphs in K', the imports closure of K, also
satisfies all the RDF graphs in Q. K is OWL Full consistent if there is
some OWL Full interpretation that satisfies all the RDF graphs in K'."

Note the closing of the parenthesis, and the mention of K' as the
imports closure of K. You would also have to make a similar change to
the definition of OWL DL entailment.

Please let me know if you agree.

Jeff
Received on Monday, 19 May 2003 14:48:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:00 GMT