W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > October to December 2003

Re: RDF Semantics: D-interpretations

From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 09:27:18 -0600
Message-Id: <p06001f00bbd8003b1415@[]>
To: herman.ter.horst@philips.com
Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org

>This is a new comment - I am sorry that I
>didn't see this before the LC2 deadline.
>D-interpretations are defined of RDF graphs and not
>for vocabularies.
>This seems to contradict the great stress in the document
>on uniformity of the various definitions of entailment.
>I vaguely remember that in an early version of the text
>there was a reason to define D-interpretations for graphs
>and not for vocabularies.
>However, the current definition uses only the properties
>of an rdfs-interpretation and nothing about the graph G.
>So it seems that this can easily be changed to become
>consistent and uniform with the remainder of the document.
>My proposal is to define D-interpretations of vocabularies
>instead of graphs.
>A motivation for making this change is that the OWL
>Semantics document explicitly makes use of the definition
>of D-interpretations, for vocabularies and not for graphs.

Indeed.  This was, as you surmise, left over from a time when an 
assertion in the graph of the form

aaa rdf:type rdfs:datatpe .

was being considered to be a 'declaration' of aaa as a datatype. This 
has for some time been absorbed into the general semantic machinery, 
however, so that the change in definition is no longer required.  I 
will correct this, thanks for noticing it.


>Herman ter Horst

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 Wednesday, 12 November 2003 10:27:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:44:04 UTC