- From: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
- Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 16:10:09 +0100
- To: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- CC: axel@polleres.net, "Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 4 March 2008 15:10:30 UTC
Dave Reynolds wrote: > > Jos de Bruijn wrote: > >> So, we really want to take into account all IRIs representing a >> particular domain element. Since this is a set, we would need to use >> a built-in predicates. For example: >> >> "Let I be an interpretation, let u be an element in the domain of I, and >> let {i1, ..., in} be the set of IRIs that denote u, i.e. for each ij >> (1 <= j <= n) IC(ij)=u. IR(iriToString)(u,"ij")=t for (1 <= j <= n); >> IR(iriToString)(u,s)=f for every element s not in {"i1", ..., "in"}." >> >> The rule set >> iriToString("b"^^rif:iri,"b"^^xsd:string) >> >> is satisfied in every RIF interpretation. > > But in any semantic web context one couldn't determine the truth or > falsity of: > > iriToString("foo"^^rif:iri,"bar"^^xsd:string) right. In some interpretations the formula might be true, whereas in other interpretations it would be false. So, it would not be entailed by the empty rule set. Best, Jos > > Dave -- debruijn@inf.unibz.it Jos de Bruijn, http://www.debruijn.net/ ---------------------------------------------- One man that has a mind and knows it can always beat ten men who haven't and don't. -- George Bernard Shaw
Received on Tuesday, 4 March 2008 15:10:30 UTC