[closed] pfps-04, pfps-05: dissatisfaction with the entailment rules development

Peter-

with reference to your comments
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0091.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0090.html

concerning the completeness of the RDF and RDFs entailment rules, 
archived as pfps-04 and pfps-05,

http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-04
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-05

Your most recent comment, in response to the WG's reply, expresses 
deep dissatisfaction:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JulSep/0178.html

I believe that the most recent account of the rules, visible at

http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-mt-20030117/

may be more satisfactory as a response to your original objection and 
the subsequent comments. See in particular

http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-mt-20030117/#simpleRules

which provides a complete set of rules for detecting all cases of 
simple entailment, and

http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-mt-20030117/#RDFSRules

et. seq. , which provides a syntactic criterion for detecting 
inconsistency in RDFS.

Please reply, CCing www-rdf-comments@w3.org, to indicate if this 
response is satisfactory as a resolution of the original comments.

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