- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2012 17:23:06 +0100
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Cc: Jonathan A Rees <rees@mumble.net>, www-tag@w3.org
ht writes:
> 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.
OK, so now I've gotten to the example [2], and it indeed _uses_ what
is clearly _intended_ to be the only IRI in the extension indicated by
ex:TimeDependentProperty. But the example extension graph, notated
{ ex:TimeDependentProperty a rdfs:Class }
in fact uses _three_ IRIs, namely "ex:TimeDependentProperty",
"rdf:type" and "rdfs:Class", right? So how do I know which of these
is actually _in_ the extension? I.e. for which ones does their use in
a graph which inherits ex:TimeDependentProperty require appealing to
the constraints defined in that extension?
ht
[2] http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/AnotherSpin#examples
--
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 16:23:39 UTC