- From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 16:52:51 -0600
- To: herman.ter.horst@philips.com
- Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
> >>... >>> >>>> >>>>> >>In view of this, it seems better to assume that each >>>>>>>rdf(s)-interpretation satisfies all of rdfV (and >>>>>>>therefore satisfies all RDF axiomatic triples). >>>>>> >>>>>>Yes, of course (now you have pointed it out :-). I will make this >>>>>>change. Peter has previously expressed a dislike for the 'crdV' >>>>>>construction, which was introduced only to keep the closures finite >>>>>>in any case and is therefore now irrelevant. >>>>> >>>>>It seems that this is change is not consistently applied to the >>>>>document. >>>>>The definition of rdfs interpretation includes "which contain only >>>>>names form V union rdfV union rdfsV". >>>>>This phrase should be removed, and similarly for rdf interpretations. >>>> >>>>It seems harmless, since this is the vocabulary of the >>>>interpretation. But it may indeed be misleading, so I have deleted it >>>>as you request. >>> >>> >>>The phrase "for all names in (V union rdfV)" is not yet deleted from >>>the definition of rdf-interpretations. >> >>As applied to the semantic conditions, it should not be deleted. Of >>course an interpretation need only satisfy the semantic conditions on >>its own vocabulary, right? What would it even mean to require it to >>satisfy conditions more broadly? This is in accordance with the >>normal textbook definitions of satisfaction and entailment. > >The table we are talking about, "RDF semantic conditions", has >three parts, none of which seems to need the additional phrase: >- part 1 deals with the universe, not the vocabulary >- parts 2 and 3 both make *explicit* that they talk about > a certain name in V >Therefore, it seems confusing to add that this table holds "for >all names in (V union rdfV)". Oh, I see your point: I thought you were indicating that it was harmful rather than redundant. OK, now removed. Pat > > >>Pat >> >>> > >Herman -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Friday, 7 November 2003 17:52:55 UTC