- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 06:25:09 +0100
- To: Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@ccf.org>
- CC: Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, SPARQL Working Group WG <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>, Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
- Message-ID: <4B9DC4B5.8080800@w3.org>
On 2010-3-15 01:48 , Chimezie Ogbuji wrote: > Ivan, > > On 3/13/10 5:19 AM, "Ivan Herman" <ivan@w3.org> wrote: >> Chime, >> I do not understand... > > Okay, I'll see if I can help with that. I've sent Jos a separate email > about this as well. > >> On 2010-3-12 21:10 , Chimezie Ogbuji wrote: > ..snip.. >> My understanding of the proposed semantics (by Axel) for rif:imports is >> that this combination is transformed as follows: >> >> 1. Starting point >> G: _:a rdf:type _:b . >> <> rif:imports <R> . >> R: empty >> >> 2. Apply the semantics >> G': _:a rdf:type _:b >> R': Import(G, <http://www.w3.org/2007/rif-import-profile#Simple>) >> >> (whether the <> rif:imports <R> is removed from G is still an open >> question but does not seem to influence this issue) > > Okay, but independent of how rif:imports is interpreted (for a lack of a > better word), the SG still only has one triple relevant to RIF-simple > entailment, right?: > > _:a rdf:type _:b > >> 3. From the RIF point of view, that is equivalent to: >> R'' : _a # _b . >> >> (using RIF's unique id-s which look very much like skolemization to me). > > Okay, this is the point where the issue comes in. I'm not sure what you > mean by 'from the RIF point of view', because - as I understand it - > entailment does not involve any RIF interpretation of the RDF graph (which > is the reason why we need to embed the triples from the scoping graph into > the RIF document in order to interpret them using RIF semantics). > This is the crucial point and I think you did the best thing by asking Jos on this, and there might indeed be a terminological/editorial issue in the RIF-RDF document (and it is the right time to signal this if there is!). My mental model of the RIF-RDF combination has always been that when a RIF rule set 'imports' an RDF graph, than this means as if all triples were effectively defined in terms as RIF frames. Ie, the import will definitely create the following: _a[rdf:type->_b] furthermore, the definition of the common interpretation with the 10 rules puts an extra set of correspondence on how to 'see' the RDF triples through a RIF glass. Ie, in my mind, that means that the RIF entailment part operates on the single rule _a # _b . If true, this means that your issue below becomes moot. If false, than I am not sure any more how this common thing works... So Jos, you are the source of all wisdom! Ivan > So, at this point (i.e., before 3 above) we form the following combination: > > <Rempty,G''> > > Where G'' is sk(G'): > > <unique-URI-1> rdf:type <unique-URI-2> (lets refer to this triple as t1) > > The problem is that there is no (simple) interpretation for G'' in which > IEXT(IS(rdf:type)) is empty. Since, G'' is ground, we know I(t1) is true > and that IEXT(IS(rdf:type)) must not be empty (from what tr/rdf-mt says > about how simple entailment interprets ground RDF graphs in 1.4). > > Since Rempty is empty, I_truth(I_isa(a,b))= false, and by the wording of > condition 7, IEXT(IS(rdf:type)) must be empty. However, above we see that > it can't be empty. > >> Do I severely miss something here? >> Actually, if what you say was true, then I think there is a problem in >> the RIF-RDF document. That has to be signalled to the RIF group > > I'm not sure if this necessarily indicates a problem with the RIF-RDF > document (hopefully Jos can speak on this) but perhaps suggests that the > embeddings (or at least some of them: Simple and RDF for example) should be > made normative since implementations cannot practically implement RIF-RDF > entailment without them. Or at least, a simple paragraph emphasizing the > counter-intuitive behavior of combinations where there is not already a > correspondence between triples, frames, and their terms. > > -- Chime > > > =================================== > > P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail > > Cleveland Clinic is ranked one of the top hospitals > in America by U.S.News & World Report (2009). > Visit us online at http://www.clevelandclinic.org for > a complete listing of our services, staff and > locations. > > > Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use > only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed > and may contain information that is privileged, > confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable > law. If the reader of this message is not the intended > recipient or the employee or agent responsible for > delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are > hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or > copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If > you have received this communication in error, please > contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in > its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy. Thank you. > -- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html FOAF : http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf vCard : http://www.ivan-herman.net/HermanIvan.vcf
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Monday, 15 March 2010 05:24:38 UTC