From: pat hayes ([email protected])
Date: 10/25/02
(BCCd to three WGs to avoid cross-postings in replies) I am hereby seeking feedback in order to help me make a decision. As editor of the RDF MT document, I have discretion to decide whether rdfs:range and rdfs:domain should have 'IF' or "IFF" semantics. What turns on this, in case anyone hasn't been following, is whether ('iff') or not ('if') the following inference should be considered valid: P rdfs:range A . A rdfs:subClassOf B . --> P rdfs:range B . I have argued for the utility of disallowing this entailment, and several people have agreed; but there also seems to be a widespread feeling that the entailment is intuitively 'reasonable'. Moreover, several people have noted a preference for having a uniform rule one way or the other, and I think it is essential that we give subClassOf and subPropertyOf an 'iff' semantics. On the other hand, the 'if' alternative makes life a little easier for inference engines. So far, all the arguments I have heard, including my own, are basically aesthetic. My request is, does anyone have a "can't live with" technical objection to either alternative? If so please send me an email in the next few days. Thanks. Pat Hayes -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32501 (850)291 0667 cell [email protected] http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 10/25/02 EDT