Re: pfps-05 RDFS closure rules

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Subject: pfps-05 RDFS closure rules
Date: 28 Jul 2003 16:28:28 +0100

> Peter,
> 
> This message concerns a last call comment you raised on the RDFCore
> semantics document recorded as:
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-05
> 
> Since the WG first responded to this comment
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003AprJun/0185.html
> 
> the semantics document has undergone further refinement and I would like
> to check with you whether the current editor's draft
> 
>   http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-mt-20030117/
> 
> is a satisfactory disposition of your comment.  Please, as usual, copy
> www-rdf-comments@w3.org on your reply.
> 
> Brian

Unfortunately, this document still has problems with the RDF and RDFS
entailment rules.  The problems are less critical because the status of the
RDFS entailment rules have been further downgraded.

Currently the document states ``This terminology is agnostic as to whether
XML data is considered to be identical to a character string''  (Section
3).  It also states that ``The document also describes complete sets of
inference rules corresponding to the semantics de[s]cribed in the text''
(Section 0.1).  

These two statements are mutually inconsistent.  Because of the rigid
nature of untyped literals and XML literals in rdf-interpretations, a
complete set of inference rules for rdf-interpretations will of necessity
determine whether an RDF XML literal is a string or not.

This problem has already been pointed out in
http://lists.w3.org/Archive/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JulSep/0055.html, 
with subsequent discussion in 
http://lists.w3.org/Archive/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JulSep/0057.html
and 
http://lists.w3.org/Archive/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JulSep/0058.html.

Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Bell Labs Research
Lucent Technologies

Received on Monday, 28 July 2003 11:58:13 UTC