W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > November 2011

Re: RDF-ISSUE-79 (undefined-datatype): What is the value of a literal whose datatype IRI is not a datatype? [RDF Concepts]

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 16:39:35 +0000
Cc: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>, public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <871A327C-34F4-4FD6-BD59-7D4CE3507F27@cyganiak.de>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
On 15 Nov 2011, at 16:30, Ivan Herman wrote:
>>>> Is it somehow possible under RDFS-Entailment + D-Entailment to get a value for "foo"^^bar if bar is not in the datatype map?
>>> 
>>> It is not possible.
>> 
>> I think you're mistaken.
>> 
>> if <bar> owl:sameAs <baz>, and <baz> is an IRI in the datatype map, then "foo"^^<bar> may have a well-defined value even if the IRI <bar> is not in the datatype map.
> 
> Just to play the disagreeable guy: owl:sameAs is not an RDFS term. If we are talking about RDFS-Entailment, this will not work...

Ok, you're right Ivan, under RDFS-Entailment "foo"^^<bar> won't have a well-defined value.

But to quote again the phrase from Section 5.1 that I quoted earlier:

[[
The condition does not require that the URI reference in the typed literal be the same as the associated URI reference of the datatype; this allows semantic extensions which can express identity conditions on URI references to draw appropriate conclusions.
]]

My original question was: Is it true that "foo"^^<bar> has an L2V-assigned value if and only if <bar> is in the domain of the datatype map? The answer to that is: “There might be entailment regimes where it's not true, OWL's RDF-based semantics being an example.”

Best,
Richard
Received on Tuesday, 15 November 2011 16:40:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:25:46 GMT