- From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 19:38:58 +0300
- To: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Hi folks, Brian asked me to bring this issue to the WG for decision, namely, we agreed at the f2f that the entailment put forth by Jeremy was important, but did not decide whether it was true or false. This was presented in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Feb/0635.html I would like to present two entailments derived from Jeremy's original posting rather than the original, to avoid the issue of multiple variant properties (ageA vs. ageB) and also to contrast the presence or absence of a globally asserted datatype for the property in question, which appears to be central to the issue. Jeremy, or anyone else, feel free to trounce and flog me if you feel these do not capture the essential aspects of the original entailment. -- Entailment 1: No global datatyping assertion Does Jenny age "10" . Tommy age _:b . _:b xsd:integer "10" . entail Jenny age _:x . Tommy age _:x . ??? -- Entailment 2: Global datatyping assertion Does age rdfd:datatype xsd:integer . Jenny age "10" . Tommy age _:b . _:b xsd:integer "10" . entail Jenny age _:x . Tommy age _:x . ??? Note that the above questions have to do with whether these entailments *should* be true, and *not* whether the present MT says they are in fact true. -- My own answers to the above two questions are: Entailment 1 should *not* be true. Entailment 2 *should* be true. Regards, Patrick -- Patrick Stickler Phone: +358 50 483 9453 Senior Research Scientist Fax: +358 7180 35409 Nokia Research Center Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
Received on Friday, 26 April 2002 12:35:54 UTC