W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > June 2012

Re: additional issue-57 use case: polysemy

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2012 17:05:41 +0100
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Cc: Jonathan A Rees <rees@mumble.net>, www-tag@w3.org
Message-ID: <f5btxyp217u.fsf@calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk>
One probably tangential query: [1] says

  "The extension graph, if provided, must be true under the semantic
   conditions of the extension."

This seems an odd constraint, if I read it correctly.  By construction
the reserved IRIs of an extension will all be _mentioned_ in its
extension graph.  But it seems unlikely that they will be _used_ in it
in most cases.  And if any of them are, why does "eat your own
cooking" need to be the case, as the above quote requires?

ht

[1] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/AnotherSpin
-- 
       Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
      10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
                Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
                       URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
 [mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged spam]
Received on Tuesday, 5 June 2012 16:08:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:33:16 UTC