- From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 08:26:01 +0100
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
A nit re. section 4.1 -- you say: [[ 1. Add all of the following triples *which contain a name in V*. These are true in any rdf-interpretation. ]] Should that be more like: [[ 1. Add all of the following triples *which contain only names in V*. These are true in any rdf-interpretation. ]] Otherwise you'd potentially end up introducing new names into the graph that are not in V? #g -- At 20:50 10/06/03 -0500, pat hayes wrote: > http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes/RDF_Semantics_Edit_nT.html > >now has some tweaks which fix some bugs noted in recent emails. > >The 'se' rules (now moved into section 4 which now has all the rule stuff >in one place) have been modified so that they only generate a single bnode >from each URiref or literal in the original graph. This is enough for the >closure lemmas and keeps them from generating all those redundant >blank-node copies. > >The definitions of rdf and rdfs interpretations have been slightly tweaked >so that the relevant vocabularies contain the rdfV and rdfsV vocabularies >(previously, an rdf-interp of V was an interpretation of V+rdfV; now it is >just of V, so one has to be explicit about V including the 'special' >vocabulary; similarly for rdfsV). The only effect of this tweak >(suggested by Dan C) is to make it possible for an rdf-interpretation to >only interpret the part of the infinite container vocabulary that it >actually needs; so the definitions of closure are now relativized to a >vocabulary, and now refer to those axioms which contain names from that >vocabulary; and the closure lemmas now refer to closures relative to the >vocabulary of (S+E). > >I have rewritten rule rdf2 so that it replaces an XML literal by its >canonical form, rather than allowing arbitrary equality substitutions. The >exact wording may need massaging, but the idea seems sound. > >Taken together, all this enables us to completely avoid the 'infinite' >cases in closures, so all closures (from finite graphs wrt a finite >vocabulary) are finite, without any need of weasel-words. > >The weird rule rdfs12 has been further modified. The elegant version >suggested by Jos unfortunately turned out to not be quite valid. This rule >may still get some further tweaking but this will not change any other >part of the MT. > >The Lbase appendix is now in line with the rest of the document; the >datatyping in particular has been rationalized. > >Apart from getting the XML literal terminology exactly aligned with >Concepts, and writing out the proofs properly, I believe this is now >pretty much done. On the other hand, Ive said that before.... > >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 ------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org> PGP: 0FAA 69FF C083 000B A2E9 A131 01B9 1C7A DBCA CB5E
Received on Wednesday, 11 June 2003 03:40:24 UTC