- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 19:18:53 -0600
- To: Peter Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
- Cc: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
We did debate this at length in a telecon. I grudgingly allowed the current phrasing, which I think is not misleading in practice. As the semantics document will have some precise results concerning skolemization and entailment, perhaps Concpets can cross-refer to that for a more exact characterization. On Feb 26, 2013, at 2:03 PM, Peter Patel-Schneider wrote: > RDF Concepts says: > > This transformation [Skolemization] does not change the meaning of an RDF graph, provided that the Skolem IRIs do not occur anywhere else. > > This isn't true. (Well, it's sort of true if you aren't looking at the semantics, but even so it should be qualified.) > > I suggest adding an "appreciably" to the statement. I am OK with that. Pat > > peter > ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2013 01:19:23 UTC