- 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