- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2002 09:37:56 +0100
- To: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>, RDF core WG <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 12:43 30/09/2002 +0100, Graham Klyne wrote: >This simple entailment test came to me while formulating some words about >datatyping... > > ex:prop rdf:range xsd:integer . > ex:subj ex:prop "10" . > >entails/doesnot entail: > > ex:subj ex:prop xsd:integer"10" . So let me check my understanding here. With tidy semantics, this entailment does not hold, because if it did, then given: <a> <b> "10" . <c> <d> "10" . we entail: <a> <b> _:l . <c> <d> _:l . If we now add to the premises <b> rdfs:range xsd:string . <d> rdfs:range xsd:decimal . then the entailment would no longer hold. That would be non-monotonic and monotonicity is a must for the model theory. Brian
Received on Tuesday, 1 October 2002 04:40:44 UTC