W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2002

Re: RDF Issue rdf-formal-semantics

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 10:17:22 -0500
To: bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com
Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <20020311101722Y.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Unfortuantely, the RDF model theory does not (yet) provide an acceptable
account of RDF semantics.  The current RDF model theory WD (of 14 February
2002) only provides an account for N-triples, and is missing other features
of RDF.

In particular, there is no treatment of RDF reification or RDF containers
in the current RDF model theory.  The current RDF model theory also does
not consider datatypes or the new thinking on RDF literals.  Finally, the
translation from RDF/XML to N-triples is performed outside this model
theory, and this translation is quite complex.

Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Bell Labs Research

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Subject: RDF Issue rdf-formal-semantics
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 14:59:49 +0000

> Peter,
> In
>     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-logic/2001Jan/0014.html
> you raised an issue which was captured in
>    http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdf-formal-semantics
> as
> [[[
> The lack of a formal semantics for RDF and RDFS make it difficult to 
> construct systems with formal semantics on top of it.
> ]]]
> As recorded in
>    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Feb/0476.html
> the RDFCore WG resolved:
>    that the model theory defines formal semantics for RDF and that this 
> issue be closed.
> Please could you respond to this message, copying www-rdf-comments@w3.org 
> indicating whether this is an acceptable resolution of this issue.
> Brian McBride
> RDFCore co-chair
Received on Monday, 11 March 2002 10:18:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:43:59 UTC