- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 09:37:27 -0400 (EDT)
- To: phayes@ihmc.us
- Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> Subject: [resolution]pfps-04; was: Comment on Last Call Working Draft of RDF Semantics document concerning RDF closure rules Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 18:20:43 -0500 > Peter, > > with reference to your comment > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0091.html > > archived as pfps-04, I am writing to ask whether the following would > be acceptable as a response. If so, I will suggest that the WG accept > your comment with this resolution. > > As you know, there have been extensive modifications to the RDF > entailment rules since your comment was written > > The current editor's draft > http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes/RDF_Semant_Edit_Weak.html > now contains a version of the RDF entailment rules which I believe > corresponds directly to the RDF semantic conditions in the sense > described. You can check the proof at > http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes/RDF_Semant_Edit_Weak.html#RDFEntailmentLemmaPrf > > Please reply to this message, copying www-rdf-comments@w3.org, > indicating whether this response adequately addresses your comment. > > Sincerely > > -- > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > I view the current version of the RDF entailment rules (31 July) as seriously incomplete, as the RDF entailment lemma requires use of a semantic relationship. Therefore, I do not feel that my concerns have been adequately addressed. peter
Received on Tuesday, 5 August 2003 09:37:43 UTC