Re: New RDF model theory

Pat--

Nice work!  A few initial comments (editorial):

*  Section 0 says "The *vocabulary* of a graph is the set of URIs that
it contains", while Section 1 says "All interpretations will be relative
to a set of URIs, called the *vocabulary* of the interpretation..." 
This could be read as effectively saying that there are two vocabularies
of URIs (one for the graph and one for the interpretation), which I
don't think you mean, since, e.g., in the latter sentence you go on to
associate this "interpretation" with "an interpretation...of an RDF
graph".  

*  Section 3 (the anonymity lemmas) says "This means that there is no
valid RDF inference process which can produce an RDF graph in which a
single anonymous node occurs in triples originating from several
different graphs."  This can be read in (at least!) two ways, one of
which is wrong.  If I group "in which a single anonymous node occurs"
with "an RDF graph" (and don't also apply it with the rest of the
sentence), a counter-example is when I merge triples originating from
several different graphs, only one of which contains a single anonymous
node (the other graphs contain no anonymous nodes).  The resulting graph
contains a single anonymous node from triples originating from several
different graphs, but since only one of those originating graphs
contained an anonymous node in the first place, everything is OK. 
Something like the following would be clearer, I think:  "This means
that there is no valid RDF inference process which can produce an RDF
graph containing a single anonymous node from several different graphs
each containing a distinct anonymous node." 

More later.

--Frank

-- 
Frank Manola                   The MITRE Corporation
202 Burlington Road, MS A345   Bedford, MA 01730-1420
mailto:fmanola@mitre.org       voice: 781-271-8147   FAX: 781-271-8752

Received on Thursday, 16 August 2001 11:04:20 UTC