W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > September 2019

Re: [dxwg] Axiomitise transitivity of dct:conformsTo through isProfileOf relationships (#844)

From: aisaac via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2019 07:49:49 +0000
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-529341973-1568015388-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
@kcoyle it makes perfect sense to discuss this in the other issues, for finding out what isProfile and conformsTo mean. As I've said, if the discussion there leads to counter examples, then they can brought in the discussion here. 
So @makxdekkers 'comment would be a better fit for #507, maybe. Same as @kcoyle 's remark on what conformance means: this is probably for #660 . But I think talking with A,B, C, D, E is good though, because this is the kind of thinking that would help us judge whether the axiom is true (with input from discussions in other issues).
I'm sorry this probably looks very pedantic a comment, but I think we must really implement what @kcoyle suggests, and try to have these various bits of discussion in the issues where they are relevant!
 
By the way maybe we're partly misunderstanding each others' intentions here, when you conclude with "I don't see anything "axiomatic""? The matter of the issue is about axiomatizing in the sense of "formalizing semantics as [(OWL) axiom](https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-owl2-primer-20121211/#Modeling_Knowledge:_Basic_Notions)". Therefore suggesting an OWL axiom is a valid proposal for the issue - even if one would disagree with this axiom. 

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by aisaac
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/844#issuecomment-529341973 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 9 September 2019 07:49:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 30 October 2019 00:15:57 UTC