RE: AS & S review: RDFS-compatible OWL semantics

[ big snip ]
> >
> > As I explained above, ICEXT is defined in terms of CI,
> > so CI is more fundamental than ICEXT and the
> > expression CEXTI(I(rdfs:Class)).
> The LCC version of RDF Semantics says
> 	x isin in ICEXT(y) iff <x,y> is in IEXT(I(rdf:type))
> 	IC = ICEXT(I(rdfs:Class))
> This looks to me as if IC is subordinate to ICEXT.

I've not followed this thread, but on this point I think I can chip in that
I am pretty sure that the RDF Core WG intent is that IC is subordinate to
ICEXT (as Peter reads). If this is not clear (as Herman reads) in the
semantics doc, please submit this as a last call editorial comment.
Alternatively, if you think that is a misguided intent then it would be
possible to submit (a somewhat less welcome) potentially substantive


Received on Thursday, 23 January 2003 04:48:55 UTC