Re: Comment on RDF Model Theory

>We suggest that the following text is in error:
>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-mt-20040210/#DTYPEINTERP
>[[
>If D is a datatype map, a D-interpretation of a vocabulary V is any 
>rdfs-interpretation I of V union {aaa: < aaa, x > in D for some x } 
>which satisfies the following extra conditions for every pair < aaa, 
>x > in D:
>]]
>
>we suggest that this text is better:
>[[
>If D is a datatype map, a D-interpretation of a vocabulary V is any 
>rdfs-interpretation I of V union {aaa: < aaa, x > in D for some x }
>union { "sss"^^aaa : < aaa, x > in D for some x and "sss" in the 
>lexical space of x }
>which satisfies the following extra conditions for every pair < aaa, x > in D:
>]]
>
>This is motivated so that the D-entailments recorded in RDF Test 
>Cases do in fact hold.
>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-testcases-20040210/#tc_cert
>e.g.
>tests
>http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/datatypes/Manifest.rdf#semantic-equivalence-within-type-1
>http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/datatypes/Manifest.rdf#semantic-equivalence-within-type-2

As editor of the RDF Semantics document, I concur with the above 
change. The text as presently written does not handle cases where the 
conclusion of an entailment contains a typed literal which is not in 
the premises. There are no such entailments for RDF(S) but they can 
occur for OWL. Thanks to Ivan Herman for noticing this.

Pat Hayes
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC		(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
40 South Alcaniz St.	(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola			(850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502			(850)291 0667    cell
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes

Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2007 15:33:17 UTC