W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > February 2009

Re: [DTB] Action 681 completed

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 13:41:11 +0000
Message-ID: <4986F7F7.20700@deri.org>
To: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
CC: "Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>

Jos de Bruijn wrote:
> 
> Axel Polleres wrote:
>> In completion of Action 681,
>>   http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/actions/681
>> I drafted two new predicates
>>
>> isLiteralOfType
>>
>> and
>>
>> isLiteralOfType
> 
> You mean: isLiteralNotOfType
> 
>>
>> Note (also an editor's note in the document):
>>  I assumed the second argument of isLiteralOfType to be a rif:iri at the
>> moment. As we defined a datatype identifier just as a unicode string
>> representing an IRI in the definition of symbol spaces, it might be
>> better to restrict the domain of the second argument to strings, yes?
> 
> I disagree. A rif:iri constant can denote an actual datatype, so you can
> speak about actual datatypes when speaking about the types of literals.

This is what we say so far:
http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/DTB#Symbol_Spaces

"The identifier of a symbol space is a sequence of Unicode characters 
that form an absolute IRI."

It is not an IRI constant, although the current definitions of 
isLiteralOfType  and isLiteralNotOfType talk about IRI constants as the 
second argument.

I am happy with either keeping it like that or changing it, just wanted 
to point out that there are two options.


> In fact, it would have been best if in BLD semantic structures the IRIs
> of datatypes are mapped to the corresponding datatypes, e.g., xsd:string
> is mapped to the XML schema string datatype.  One could then, in DTB,
> speak only about values and datatypes, which will be much more
> convenient and much more elegant.

I am not sure what you want to say here, can you explain/maybe 
illustrate with an example?

Thanks,
Axel

> We should not have moved BLD to last call before finalizing DTB :-(
> I now think we should probably redo BLD last call, after finalizing DTB.
> 
>> Moreover, I think by dropping the specific guard predicates, we can get
>> rid of the definition of short names for symbol spaces as well.
> 
> Yes.
> 
> 
> Best, Jos
> 
>>
>> Axel
>>
> 


-- 
Dr. Axel Polleres
Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland, 
Galway
email: axel.polleres@deri.org  url: http://www.polleres.net/
Received on Monday, 2 February 2009 13:42:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:34:03 GMT