- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 14:37:11 +0100
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Peter, The WG were unable to discuss this suggestion before publishing the 2nd last call documents. I propose to track this as a 2nd last call comment: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20031010-comments/#entailment-from-inconsistent-graph Brian Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > I propose that the following be a positive entailment test in the RDF test > suite. This is a valid RDFS entailment (modulo typing errors), but is not > a consequence of the current RDFS entailment rules. > > Premise > > <http://example.org/prop> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#range> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#XMLLiteral> . > <http://example.org/foo> <http://example.org/prop> "<"^^<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#XMLLiteral> . > > Conclusion > > <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> . > > > Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Received on Wednesday, 15 October 2003 09:37:54 UTC