- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 13:45:47 -0500
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, ewallace@cme.nist.gov
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
At 13:19 -0500 1/21/03, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >From: Evan Wallace <ewallace@cme.nist.gov> >Subject: Re: issues to be resolved before last call (rdfms-assertion) >Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 11:35:07 -0500 (EST) > >> >> >> Peter Patel-Schneider wrote concerning the issue of >> "social meaning": >> >> >> > > such RDF meanings can always be be proved and explained back to >> >> > > their roots and those are held responsible for what they assert! >> >> > > (plus that making information explicit removes it from the context) >> >> > >> >> > Huh? How can they be *proved*? What system will do the proving? >> >> >> >> well, I should have said *proof checked* as the >> >> formally sanctioned inference processes in above [*] >> >> should generate/exchange their proofs >> > >> >Take a look at the example in RDF Concepts. The part that makes the >> >connection is natural language. How are you going to proof check that? >> >> Is this refering to the Clown example in 2.4.3.1 of the Nov 8 version of >> the RDF Concepts document? The initial reference was to something in >> section 4.5 of the concepts document, but I found no example there at >> all. >> >> -Evan >> > >You may need to look at the LCC version of the RDF Concepts document. A >pointer is on the RDF Core WG home page. > >peter Evan - Peter is right - it is section 4.5 of the Last Call Candidate - the pointer to that section is http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-concepts-20030117/#section-InteractionExample -- Professor James Hendler hendler@cs.umd.edu Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies 301-405-2696 Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab. 301-405-6707 (Fax) Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 240-731-3822 (Cell) http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler
Received on Tuesday, 21 January 2003 13:45:56 UTC