Re: pfps-05 RDFS closure rules [not complete yet]

>>I believe that the rules for rdfs entailments are still incomplete in the
>>current version of RDF Semantics (Editors [sic] Draft July 27).
>>
>>For example, consider the RDF graph
>>
>>	ex:foo ex:bar "<"^^rdf:XMLLiteral .
>>	ex:bar rdfs:range rdf:XMLLiteral .
>>
>>I believe that this graph has no rdfs-intepretations
>
>Yes, you are right. I had overlooked this case; and the proof 
>implicitly assumes that XML literals are wellformed.
>
>I will modify the statement of the RDFS entailment lemma so as to 
>exclude such cases, by requiring the antecedent to be consistent. I 
>will also add explanatory text to section 5, which has a paragraph
>which curently ends:
>"An ill-typed literal does not in itself constitute an 
>inconsistency, but a graph which entails that an ill-typed literal 
>has rdf:type rdfs:Literal would be inconsistent."
>
>to be modified to:
>
>"An ill-typed literal does not in itself constitute an 
>inconsistency, but a graph which entails that an ill-typed literal 
>has rdf:type rdfs:Literal, or that an ill-typed XML literal has 
>rdf:type rdf:XMLLiteral, would be inconsistent."

I have also made a few other additions to the text in various places 
to draw attention to this, eg a brief mention and warning about 
trivial entailments in section 4.3. They can be traced from the 
change log in

http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes/RDF_Semant_Edit_Central.html

Pat
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC	(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32501			(850)291 0667    cell
phayes@ihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes

Received on Saturday, 2 August 2003 17:59:15 UTC