W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > October 2013

RDF-ISSUE-159 (interpretations): RDF Semantics - Definition of "Interpretation" is missing [RDF Semantics]

From: RDF Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 03:10:16 +0000
Message-Id: <E1VU6dk-00008A-2l@shauna.w3.org>
To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
RDF-ISSUE-159 (interpretations): RDF Semantics - Definition of "Interpretation" is missing [RDF Semantics]

http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/159

Raised by: Peter Patel-Schneider
On product: RDF Semantics

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Oct/0035.html

>From David Booth

Regarding
http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-rdf11-mt-20130723/

Section 4 of the RDF Semantics is careful to define all of the major terms that are used within the document . . . except one.  AFAICT, the general notion of an "interpretation" is nowhere defined.  Later in the document, specific kinds of interpretations are defined, such as Simple Interpretations, RDF Interpretations and RDFS Interpretations.  But AFAICT a definition of the general notion of an interpretation is completely absent.

The 2004 version of the semantics had a very nice explanation of the notion of interpretations:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-mt-20040210/#interp
and it had a glossary definition of the term:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-mt-20040210/#glossInterpretation

I don't know why the current draft eliminated those sections, but somehow the RDF Semantics needs to explain what is meant by an "interpretation", since the notion is central to the semantics.

I would suggest restoring the explanation from the 2004 version, but I would be fine with some other replacement instead.

Thanks,
David
Received on Thursday, 10 October 2013 03:10:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:33 UTC