- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 20:05:52 -0600
- To: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>pat hayes wrote: > >>>(onlist) >>> >>>Just a notification that I'm going to change the Primer references >>>to be the same as those in both the Syntax and Concepts docs >>>(e.g., RDF-VOCABULARY instead of RDF-SCHEMA). >> >> >>In the MT I use 'vocabulary' to mean a set of urirrefs (that get >>interpreted by an interpretation). The prefixes rdf- , rdfs-, etc, >>are used to distinguish different senses of satisfiability, >>entailment etc, which refer to different kinds of interpretation. >>That means that it would be natural to take 'rdf-vocabulary' to >>mean a set of urirefs being interpreted using the RDF >>interpretation rules (which in this case means that rdf:Property >>and rdf:type have to interpreted correctly, but the rest is peanut >>butter). Would that cause any confusion, do you think? >> > > >Well, just to clarify something, what I was talking about wasn't >terminology for use in discussion, but merely citations, i.e., now >the Primer reference section lists: Oh, OK. > >[RDF-SCHEMA] >RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema , D. Brickley >and R. V. Guha, Editors. Work in progress, April 2002. World Wide >Web Consortium, 30 April 2002.etc. etc. > >And I'm going to change [RDF-SCHEMA] to [RDF-VOCABULARY]. I'm not >(at least, not yet) worried about the meaning of "rdf-vocabulary". > >However, since you've asked, let me see if I've understood you >correctly: you're going to be able to say that a given collection >of URIrefs, considered as an "rdf vocabulary", would involve one >kind of interpretation, considered as an "rdfs vocabulary", would >involve another kind of interpretation, and considered as (say) an >"OWL vocabulary" would involve yet another kind? That was what I was suggesting, but I would rather not do this, in fact, so if there is no pressing need to do so (which I thought there was, but that was a misunderstanding)., then I won't. As you note below, it could get confusing. Pat > That seems reasonable. There might need to be some discussion >somewhere to point out, for example, that with this definition of >"vocabulary", vocabulary defined in the "RDF Vocabulary Description >Language" could sometimes appear in non-rdf vocabularies (if you see >what I mean): say, that the term >http://www.example.org/classes/Person defined in an RDF Schema might >appear in something other than an "rdf vocabulary" in your sense (it >might appear in an OWL vocabulary). > >--Frank > > > > >-- >Frank Manola The MITRE Corporation >202 Burlington Road, MS A345 Bedford, MA 01730-1420 >mailto:fmanola@mitre.org voice: 781-271-8147 FAX: 781-271-875 -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32501 (850)291 0667 cell phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes s.pam@ai.uwf.edu for spam
Received on Tuesday, 5 November 2002 21:05:37 UTC