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

Re: semantics proof appendix fixed

From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 00:37:47 +0200
To: "pat hayes <phayes" <phayes@ihmc.us>
Cc: Brian_McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, Eric Miller <em@w3.org>, Herman terHorst <herman.ter.horst@philips.com>, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, w3c-rdfcore-wg-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF4A4395C7.547369D9-ONC1256DBE.007BD91C-C1256DBE.007C4EED@agfa.be>

> There is a version of the LC2 Semantics document with @@ in its date line
> http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes/RDF_Semantics_LC2.4.html
> which finally has a readable proof appendix.
> It also has an improved version of the entailment rules. The
> 'closures' for RDF and RDFS now use only a very restricted form of
> the simple entailment rules which apply only to literal objects (as
> you will see in the proof, for RDF one only needs to use this on
> well-formed XML literals, in fact) and all the subsequent similar
> rules (rdf2, rdfs1, rdfD1) are linked to this rule, so that the
> closures only generalize in a very restricted way so as to, in
> effect, provide unique blank-node surrogates for literals, which is
> sufficient for completeness. The results given here still apply to
> the older rules, since those generate all these conclusions and more,
> but the rules given here are leaner and meaner.  Jos and Graham, if
> you check out the definition of rdf-closure in the proofs, you will
> get an even leaner and meaner RDF version.

That is great news Pat - will do (but have to first travel, 3 days
Munich, leaving in 4 hours, oops... again not a lot of sleep and
I'm just back from a week Canada, have a big cold, fever, ...)
Anyhow, I'm looking forward to "an even leaner and meaner RDF version"

thanks Pat

Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Monday, 13 October 2003 18:37:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:26 UTC