- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 17:34:35 -0500
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>From: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo@agfa.com> >Subject: Re: [closed] pfps-05 >Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 13:21:49 +0200 > >> >> [removed www-rdf-comments from the cc and added w3c-rdfcore-wg] >> >> > For example, I am currently unable to determine whether the following >> > entailment >> > > > > ex:foo ex:prop "a"^^foo:bar . >> > >> > entails >> > >> > ex:foo ex:prop _:x . >> > _:x rdf:type rdfs:Resource . >> >> Using appropriate namespace prefixes >> >> @prefix ex: <http://example.org/ex#>. >> @prefix foo: <http://example.org/foo#>. >> >> I have found that entailment working >> >> ex:foo ex:prop "a"^^foo:bar. >> "a"^^foo:bar rdf:type rdfs:Resource. >> >> -- >> Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/ > >I am *not* asking whether some piece of software produces the result. I am >instead asking whether an entailment holds. Sigh. The entailment is trivial: ex:foo ex:prop "a"^^foo:bar . ex:foo ex:prop _:x . by rule se1 _:x rdf:type rdfs:Resource . by rule rdfs4a Similar entailments follow a similar route. The SE rules apply to any literal form. However, I doubt if this will satisfy you, since there are infinitely many other entailments you might fail to be convinced of, and you are apparently unwilling to accept that entailments might be checkable by software. 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@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes s.pam@ai.uwf.edu for spam
Received on Friday, 30 May 2003 18:34:42 UTC