- From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 18:28:14 -0500
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: rdf core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
>Hi Pat, > >Sorry if you get this twice - having email trouble again. > >On Wed, 2003-07-30 at 20:18, pat hayes wrote: >> >I just noticed an editorial (?) tweak (pointed out by pfps) to the >> >semantics document that the semantic constraint that properties must be >> >a subset of resources has been removed from the current editors draft. >> > >> >http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-mt-20030117/#interp >> > >> >Pat, this is rather more than just an editorial tweak. >> >> This is only for simple interpretations. It does not make any >> difference to RDF or RDFS interpretations, since those >> interpretations are still required to conform to the subset condition >> by virtue of their semantic conditions; cf. section 3, 5th para >> (after the table of RDF semantic conditions): > >I am greatly relieved to hear that. I didn't read the para you quote. >I just checked the maths of the semantic conditions and they didn't seem >to require that properties are resources. I then checked the (now >complete?) closure rules in 7.2 and couldn't see how the desired >entailment could be attained from them either. Well, no, it can't in RDF, because "Resource" isn't in the RDF namespace, it is rdfs:Resource. If it had been rdf:Resource then rdfs 4a/b would have been rdf 4a/b. > >I know better than to argue mathematics with you, but maybe you could >point out what I'm missing? I hope that I got that one right. If not, let me know ASAP. Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32501 (850)291 0667 cell phayes@ihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Thursday, 31 July 2003 19:28:16 UTC