- From: <herman.ter.horst@philips.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 17:01:44 +0100
- To: www-rdf-comments@w3.org, phayes@ai.uwf.edu
RDF Semantics document, last call version, 23 january 2003 This comment was mailed earlier to the WebOnt WG [1]. Consideration of rdfs-entailments from the empty RDF graph shows that there is an error in the RDFS entailment lemma. In line with the definition in 3.3, one triple should be entailed for each of the 13 entries following "IC contains": rdfs:Resource rdf:type rdfs:Class . etc. (including a triple rdfs:XMLLiteral rdf:type rdfs:Class . although rdfs:XMLLiteral does not appear in the table in 3.3) and one triple should be entailed for each of the entries following "IP contains": rdf:type rdf:type rdfs:Property . etc. Each of these 13 + 16 + aleph-0 triples (16 is counted without duplicates; the "aleph-0 triples" are from rdf:_1 etc.) follows by using the axiomatic triples in combination with the closure rules from 4.2, apart from one of these triples: The triple rdf:value rdf:type rdfs:Property . (*) is rdfs-entailed by but is not in the rdfs-closure of the empty rdf graph, since rdf:value never appears in either the axiomatic triples or the closure rules. (This gives a test case for this problem: according to the normative definition, the empty graph rdfs-entails the triple (*), but this is not confirmed by the rdfs entailment lemma.) In particular, moreover, each of the 11 triples mentioned under part 1. of the definition of rdfs closure can safely be omitted from that definition. (Note that one of these 11 triples, rdf:nil rdf:type rdf:list . is already in the definition of rdf closure.) The following 4 derivation patterns suffice for each of these 13 + 15 + aleph-0 proofs (This might be added to the proof sketch of the rdfs entailment lemma): I x rdfs:range y . rdfs:range rdfs:domain rdf:Property . rdfs:range rdfs range rdf:Class . together imply x rdf:type rdf:Property y rdf:type rdf:Class II similarly for domain instead of range III rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:domain rdfs:Class . rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:domain rdfs:Class . x rdfs:subClassOf y . together emply x rdf:type rdfs:Class . y rdf:type rdfs:Class . IV similary for subPropertyOf instead of subClassOf (For the proofs involving rdf:_1 etc. also the triples from part 2. of the definition of rdfs closure are used.) Herman ter Horst Philips Research [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Feb/0313.html
Received on Friday, 21 February 2003 11:27:26 UTC