W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > November 2012

Re: RDF-ISSUE-106 (concepts-and-semantics): Relationship between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics [RDF Concepts]

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 11:58:22 -0500
Message-Id: <BD2C0AC5-0BC9-4C45-B009-49FF9708D6D1@w3.org>
To: RDF Working Group <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
My first, gut reaction... (meaning that I may be convinced otherwise...)

On Nov 7, 2012, at 11:24 , RDF Working Group Issue Tracker wrote:

> RDF-ISSUE-106 (concepts-and-semantics): Relationship between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics [RDF Concepts]
> http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/106
> Raised by: Richard Cyganiak
> On product: RDF Concepts
> The relationship between RDF Concepts and RDF Semantics is poorly defined and needs to be clarified.
> A principled decision is necessary on what exactly the “interface” between Concepts and Semantics is. What notions should be defined in what spec? What notions should Concepts import from Semantics (if any)? Does conformance to Concepts depend on conformance to Semantics?
> There is currently some stuff in Concepts that perhaps shouldn't be there because it's about Semantics:
> * There is a Note on comparing literals that makes a rather oblique reference to semantic notions of comparison.
> * There are scattered references to IRI equality and literal equality throughout the text, but nothing on blank node equality or graph equality. The latter concepts would enter RDF Semantics territory. (Graph isomorphism is defined and is a syntactic notion).
> * There is a Note on graph merging, a notion that is defined only in RDF Semantics.
> Some semantics-related content that perhaps should be in Concepts, but isn't:
> * A definition of Graph Merge

+1, though probably informally...

> * A definition of Lean Graphs

+1, though probably informally...

> * Import (via reference to Semantics) of notions of equivalence, entailment, inconsistency between RDF graphs (at least informatively)

Very informally...

> * At least an informative definition of “entailment regime”?

I am not sure. Just refer

> * Informative entailment rules?

I am not sure. Just refer to the document-to-come

(I am not sure what you meant by 'informative entailment rules', though; is it just to say what they are, or give some explicit rule examples?)



Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Wednesday, 7 November 2012 16:58:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:23 UTC