Re: an interesting non-entailment

On 21/07/2023 21:59, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> As far as I can tell,
>
> :a :h "x"@EN {| :accordingTo :e |} .
>
> does not entail
>
> :a :h "x"@en {| :accordingTo :e |} .
>
> in the community group semantics, even if the underlying semantics is 
> the RDFS semantics.

It boils down to deciding whether "x"@EN and "x"@en are the /same/ 
literal (syntactically) or not.

I agree with you that a strict reading of RDF 1.1 leads to the 
conclusion that they are not :
literal are consider the same "if the two lexical forms, the two 
datatype IRIs, and the two language tags (if any) compare equal, 
character by character." However, the definition of literal says: 
"Lexical representations of language tags /MAY/ be converted to lower 
case."  Meaning that the literals are not the same, but people are 
allowed to arbitrarily replace one by the other at any time... In my 
view, this is a bug.

Gregg's PR #48 on rdf12-concepts fixes this [1] by making the conversion 
to lower case part of the comparison for term equality.

   pa


[1] 
https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/pull/48/files#diff-97efdc0e30285fae4d5cb7cc4a510dbaa7c33f4e56d4216dcde109ad2cdef15fL735


>
>
> peter
>