- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 12:52:52 +0000
- To: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
- Cc: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, www-rdf-comments@w3.org
I encountered an example in some work on network access control I did... It wouldn't strictly be a test case, since there is no way to mechanically test it, but if it seems appropriate I can dig it out. And there was another that came up in discussion of RDF vocabulary for iCalendar. #g -- At 11:25 AM 2/27/03 -0800, Seth Russell wrote: >pat hayes wrote: > >>>>that any social meaning applied to RDF usage at least be *conformant* >>>>to the formal meaning. >>> >>> >>>But what does it mean to conform? >> >> >>BE such as would be preserved under valid (according to the MT) entailments. > > >I would like to see a test case of that. Let me propose one and you can >tell me if I am close. Suppose there is a web service [A] that adds a >person's name to a database when it discovers a RDF document which >asserts that he\she is a person. For example someone publishes the >document [B]. Is the social meaning of document [B] something like [P]: >"[A] should add the name 'Pat Hayes' to the person database with the email >address of 'phayes@ai.uwf.edu' " ? > >Document [B] contains the triples: > >_:a rdf:type foaf:Person >_:a foaf:mbox "phayes@ai.uwf.edu" >_:a foaf:givenname "Pat" >_:a foaf:surname "Hayes" > >If the web service does add your name and email address to the database, >is it conforming? > >Now lets say that agent [A] discovers another document [C] which contains >the triples below: > >_:a rdf:type ex:Bot >_:a foaf:mbox "sethBot@robustai.net" >_:a foaf:givenname "SethBot" > >and somewhere else [A] discovers [D]: > >ex:Bot rdf:subClass foaf:Person > >If the web service does *not* add my name to the databse, would you say it >was *not* conforming ? > >Is that a legitimate example of "social meaning applied to RDF usage >being at least be *conformant* to the formal meaning" ? > >Suppose the triple is common knowledge amoung such web services but [A] >never does discover it. Has the social meaning of document [C] >changed? Has the conformance of the web service changed ? > >Seth Russell ------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Friday, 28 February 2003 08:32:20 UTC