Re: model theory state of play

Pat,

One of my tasks for today is to place pointers to editors drafts on the WG home 
page.  Are you comfortable with having a pointer to your editor draft placed 
there?  If so, is it possible to have a stable URL for it so I don't have to 
keep changing it when we change versions (I notice what looks like a version 
number in the one below).

Brian


Pat Hayes wrote:

> Sorry about the delay, I have been somewhat slowed down for medical 
> reasons. There is a revised draft of the MT (dated 3 October) now 
> visible at
> http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/users/phayes/w3-rdf-mt-2.1_draft.html
> 
> It is not completely finished (or spell/link/html-checked); the 
> appendices and references need fixing, but the main text is close to 
> done and will give the flavor of the proposed changes, most of which are 
> in the presentation rather than the content. Feedback welcomed. Sorry I 
> havn't managed to style-mark all the changes, there were just too many.
> 
> I made minor improvements to the wording in several places, added a few 
> explanatory sentences to cover cases that gave rise to 
> misunderstandings, etc. .Major changes are:
> rdf entailment re-christened 'simple entailment'; ('rdf entailment' now 
> refers to the rdf mini-vocabulary in section 3)
> 0.2 RDF graph definition fixed, with some links to web explanations of 
> technical terms (is this kind of outward linking considered kosher in 
> W3C documents, by the way?)
> 1.2 rewritten to introduce notion of reserved vocabulary
> old section 2 absorbed into subsections 1.5 and 1.6 (rationalization, no 
> content changed) 1.6 is somewhat rewritten to refer to the DAML 
> axiomatic semantics. The new figure should be bug-free.
> 2 (old 3) unchanged apart from terminology shift in introduction.
> 3. New
> 4. New, introduces idea of namespace entailment
> 5. and 6. Revised material from old document, but presented differently.
> 6.1 New (comments particularly solicited, this could be completely 
> omitted and may be changed later in any case.)
> 7. Old section 6, rewritten to conform to new exposition style, but no 
> real change in content. Makes points better, though. (This could now be 
> rewritten now more formally in the same style as 3/4 and 5/6,or 
> incorporated into 3/4 as part of the rdf reserved vocabulary, if people 
> think that would make more sense. I await input.)
> 
> My earlier goof regarding domain and range has been fixed, and so now 
> rdf-entailment is a pretty piffling affair just involving rdf:type and 
> rdf:Property, but it does serve to introduce the idea of namespace 
> entailment and provides a contrast to the much more elaborate rdfs case. 
> Ive tried to display the rdfs closure rules in a more organized fashion 
> to show how they correspond to the semantic conditions. Jos, if you can 
> find any bugs in this, I will buy you a beer.
> 
> The treatment of literals is still under discussion. At present the only 
> substantial change from the published MT is the simple fix I mentioned 
> earlier, where ICEXT(I(rdfs:Literal)) is required only to be a subset of 
> LV.  Peter thinks that this isn't adequate, and that a somewhat larger 
> fix will be required in which literal values are completely removed from 
> all contact with the range/subclass conditions in rdfs, but I'm not 
> fully convinced yet. :-)
> 
> Pat
>

Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2001 06:28:23 UTC