W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > June 2003

Re: Cut back RDFCore semantics doc

From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 11:55:27 -0500
Message-Id: <p0521060ebb1642c49bf5@[]>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

>My old project manager instincts are to cut right back to the
>essentials, but I hear HP and Jos (and I think Pat) prefering option b,
>which I consider riskier but acceptable. Does anyone wish to argue
>against that?

I think it is low-to-zero risk, with the document in its present 
form.  For calibration, I think that our documents are now MUCH more 
thoroughly debugged than the published XML Schema part 2 documents.

BTW, I drafted the _append version before reading all the emails. The 
document simply makes no mention of completeness, but it would still 
be low-risk to add 2  sentences like:

" We believe that these rules are complete in the following sense: if 
S rdf(s)-entails E then there is a graph which can be derived from 
S+the rdf(+rdfs) axiomatic triples by these rules which simply 
entails E. However, this has not been conclusively established at the 
time of writing."

Note that this does not mention closures, so the question of whether 
or not they are finite does not come up.

This is done in a modified version: 
dated 18a June

I will try to propose resolutions for the outstanding semantic issues 
asap, but I may have to get on a plane soon.

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 Wednesday, 18 June 2003 12:55:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:23 UTC