- From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 11:57:18 +0100 (BST)
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, w3c-rdfcore-wg <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > > > Summary: > Prefer c++ > modify the test case to say that the case is D-consistent with the > empty graph, not that it is D-entailed by it; > add D-inconsistent test using a different rdfs:subClassOf triple between > xsd datatypes. > > > > > pat hayes wrote: > > > > (a) modify the test case doc by deleting the test case; > > Not particularly OK, well unless the semantics doc discusses > rdfs:subClassOf in datatyping clearly. i.e. this should not be left as an > exercise for the reader. > > > (b) modify the test case to say that this only follows under the > > strengthened extensional semantic conditions on rdfs:subClassOf > > described in section 4.1 of the semantics document; > > not good > > > (c) modify the test case to say that the case is D-consistent with the > > empty graph, not that it is D-entailed by it; > > OK > Also add a test case showing that > xsd:string rdfs:subClassOf xsd:integer . > is inconsistent. > > > (d) modify the semantics of D-interpretations to insist that datatype > > class subsetting *is* treated extensionally, so that the rule rdfD4 is > > valid and the test case is OK. This can be done by adding the following > > semantic condition on D-interpretations: > > Prefer (c) to this. > (Another option is to explicitly list rdfs:subClassOf relationships between > xsd datatypes as true by fiat). This last option seemed the "obvious" one to me: that a datatype definition might well include subClassOf "axiomatic triples". The test case document currently doesn't have explicit "consistent/inconsistent" test cases; these have usually been encoded using entailment or non-entailment of false graphs. So the new test cases would be that: 1. [[ xsd:integer rdfs:subClassOf xsd:decimal . ]] DOES NOT rdfs+D(xsd:integer, xsd:decimal)-entail [[ FALSE ]] (the "false" graph) 2. [[ xsd:integer rdfs:subClassOf xsd:string . ]] rdfs+D(xsd:integer, xsd:string)-entails [[ FALSE ]] ... is that ok? -- jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/ Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 http://ioctl.org/jan/ It's a sad fact that the word "semantics" seems to have lost all meaning.
Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2003 09:21:09 UTC