- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 09:38:01 -0600
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>At 13:31 04/02/2002 -0600, Pat Hayes wrote: >[...] > >>We have containers that have ordered selectors, ie the ordering is >>built into the very syntax of the selectors. So the containers >>simply *are* ordered in any RDF interpretation, whether we want to >>treat that order as significant or not. So we cannot make rdf:bags >>into unordered entities in the RDF model theory. > >That would work for me. > >[...] > >>If this is acceptable then it is trivial to add rdf:seq and rdf:bag >>to the MT. I've already written the relevant section. (Adding >>rdf:Alt to the MT is something else altogether: I would suggest >>that we simply abandon rdf:Alt.) > >Could we pull a similar stunt with Alt as with Bag. An Alt is >simply bag with a hint that applications might consider the first >element as different from the others, i.e. the model theory ignores >the semantics of Alt. Oh well, sure, if we ignore the semantics then we can do anything. The problem with Alt is that if you follow the, er, hint, then your conclusions actually *contradict* valid RDF conclusions, ie in this sense Alt is nonmonotonic. Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Monday, 11 February 2002 10:37:11 UTC