- From: Stella Mitchell <stellamit@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:02:47 -0400
- To: Public-Rif-Wg <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Received on Thursday, 11 June 2009 19:03:24 UTC
These all look correct to me.
In [3] and [4] I don't understand the role of the subclass statement in the
premise (why it is needed in [4] for the conclusion to hold).
In [5] I think the import profile is intended to be Simple instead of RDFS
(to make the comparison with [6] more clear))?
For dialects:
(noting that a test case conclusion is a condition)
[1] [2] - Core (and so also PRD and BLD)
[3] [4] [6] - BLD
[5] - BLD and PRD, but not Core
I made a small update to the text of the purpose field for [1] and [2] to
mention rdf:type and #
Stella
[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_SubClass
[2] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_SubClass_2
[3] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_SubClass_3
[4] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_SubClass_4
[5] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_SubClass_5
[6] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_SubClass_6
Received on Thursday, 11 June 2009 19:03:24 UTC