RDF语义 推荐标准-6
TransWiki - an Open Translation Project(OTP)
摘要_文档状态_目录 第0节 第1节 第2节 第3节 第4节 第5节 第6节 第7节 附录_参考文献
6. Monotonicity of semantic extensions
Given a set of RDF graphs, there are various ways in which one can 'add' information to it. Any of the graphs may have some triples added to it; the set of graphs may be extended by extra graphs; or the vocabulary of the graph may be interpreted relative to a stronger notion of vocabulary entailment (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-mt-20040210/#vocabulary_entail), i.e. with a larger set of semantic conditions understood to be imposed on the interpretations. All of these can be thought of as an addition of information, and may make more entailments hold than held before the change. All of these additions are monotonic, in the sense that entailments which hold before the addition of information, also hold after it. We can sum up this in a single lemma:
General monotonicity lemma. Suppose that S, S' are sets of RDF graphs with every member of S a subset of some member of S'. Suppose that Y indicates a semantic extension of X, S X-entails E, and S and E satisfy any syntactic restrictions of Y. Then S' Y-entails E.
In particular, if D' is a datatype map (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-mt-20040210/#defDatatypeMap), D a subset of D' and if S D-entail (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-mt-20040210/#D_entailment)s E then S also D'-entails E.
