proof bug in semantics

Guys, I have to report a slight disaster. Trying to respond to 
Peter's suggestion that we should provide a clear rule-based 
criterion for RDFS inconsistency, and to prove the resulting lemma, I 
found a serious flaw in the proofs of the RDF and RDFS entailment 
lemmas.  There just wasnt time to get nice versions of the corrected 
proofs written out by the publishing deadline, so the 10/10 semantics 
document has some ugly stuff in its proof appendix, written in a 
hurry and with parts of it rather sketchy.

I apologize to the WG for this. I hope to have really nice proofs 
done by early next week, and they can be editorial tweaks to the 
final publication version.

None of this affects the normative parts of the document.

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, 9 October 2003 23:12:48 UTC