- From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 15:40:24 -0500
- To: "Seth Russell" <seth@robustai.net>
- Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
>Now let me ask a more practical question which, hopefully, will help me >focus my understanding of your document. Before the Model Theory [1], we >had RDF graphs and detailed specifications of how to form and communicate >them [2 - 6]. Can you provide an actual example of a RDF graph that adheres >to those specifications, yet is invalid according to the Model Theory ? Correction. I said that validity does not apply to graphs but to inference processes. Peter's message reminds me that there is indeed a sense of 'valid' which would apply to a graph, ie true in every interpretation. There are no valid RDF graphs in this sense. There are some valid RDFS graphs, but they consist only of boring stuff like the fact that the rdfs:domain of rdfs:subClassOf is rdfs:Class. I'm not sure what you mean by 'invalid'. If you mean, not valid, see above. If you mean inconsistent, ie false in every interpretation, then there are no inconsistent graphs in either RDF or RDFS. Pat Hayes -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Thursday, 4 October 2001 16:40:30 UTC