ISSUE-84: proposed solution

ISSUE-84: "Bug" in D-entailment with literals in non-canonical form

To sum up, the issue says that in RDF Semantics 2004, the graph:

{ <s> <p> "2"^^xsd:decimal . }

does *NOT* D-entail the graph:

{ <s> <p> "2.0"^^xsd:decimal . }

However, the graph:

{ <s> <p> "2"^^xsd:decimal .
   <x> <y> "2.0"^^xsd:decimal . }

D-entails the graph:

{ <s> <p> "2.0"^^xsd:decimal . }

This is weird.



A solution would be to replace the definition of D-interpretation, which 
currently says:

"If D is a datatype map, a D-interpretation of a vocabulary V is any 
rdfs-interpretation I of V union { aaa: <aaa,x> in D for some x } which 
satisfies the following extra conditions for every pair <aaa, x> in D:"

by:

"If D is a datatype map, a D-interpretation of a vocabulary V is any 
rdfs-interpretation I of V union { aaa: <aaa,x> in D for some x } union 
{ lll: lll in L(x) for a pair <aaa,x> in D } which satisfies the 
following extra conditions for every pair <aaa, x> in D:"


Regards,
-- 
Antoine Zimmermann
ISCOD / LSTI - Institut Henri Fayol
École Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Saint-Étienne
158 cours Fauriel
42023 Saint-Étienne Cedex 2
France
Tél:+33(0)4 77 42 66 03
Fax:+33(0)4 77 42 66 66
http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/

Received on Tuesday, 6 November 2012 18:33:01 UTC