W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > November 2001

Re: closing semantic issues

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2001 13:25:09 -0500
To: phayes@ai.uwf.edu
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <20011105132509H.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Subject: Re: closing semantic issues
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 12:13:46 -0600


> >  In particular, rdf:Bag is not a bag
> >at all, but instead is much more like a sequence.
> Right, and that is exactly how the M&S so describes it, by insisting 
> that :_1, :_2 and so on apply to *all* containers. It would be easy 
> to change the MT to describe a different notion than rdf:Bag, but 
> then it would not in fact describe RDF.
> >  If rdf is going to have
> >something called rdf:Bag, then its *RDF* semantics should conform to the
> >intended meaning of bags!
> Its model theory should conform to its intended meaning, but if that 
> intended meaning is not in conformity with a broader notion of 'bag', 
> then don't blame the model theory.  What you are complaining about 
> here is an issue in how RDF should treat containers, but its not a 
> model theory issue.

I'm not blaming the model theory at all here.  However, I am blaming the
``theory'' of rdf:Bag as expressed in M&S.  

Let me restate my objection then:

If RDF is going to have something called rdf:Bag, then its *RDF* semantics
should conform to the generally-accepted meaning of bags, and not to some
other meaning.  If the RDF semantics of this thing do not conform to the
generally-accepted meaning of bags then it should be given a different

(This comment, of course, does not apply to Humpty Dumpty.

	`When _I_ use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful
	tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor
	less.'  [Through the Looking Glass, Lewis Caroll]


Received on Monday, 5 November 2001 13:26:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:06 UTC