W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > December 2001

Re: Question about S

From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:11:44 +0000
Message-Id: <>
To: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
At 01:06 AM 12/13/01 +0200, Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote:

>OK, I alluded to a question that I've asked several
>times about a characteristic of the S approach for
>which I feel I haven't gotten a satisfactory answer.
>I did get one very short comment from Pat, which merely
>emphasized my point (and concern).
>Here is the question again with examples:
>The S examples include statements such as the following:
>    Bob ex:age _:1 .
>    _:1 s:integer "10" .
>    s:integer rdfs:domain xsd:integer .
>I understand this to mean that the node '_:1' denotes a value
>of type xsd:integer and there is a mapping to that value from
>the lexical form "10" which is presumed to be a member of the
>lexical space of xsd:integer.

The statements above, as given, don't express the idea that "10" is a 
member of the lexical
domain of xsd:integer.  Hence...

>However, this is extending the semantics of rdfs:domain in
>a way that only apples to data type properties by saying
>something about the object of the statement rather than
>the class of the subject -- i.e. that "10" is a member of the
>lexical space of xsd:integer.

There's no extension to the semantics of rdfs:domain.

The "special treatment" of datatypes is that the datatype-defining URIs 
have fixed interpretations. In the your example, having the definition of 
s:integer fixed so that its relational extension contains pairs of the form:



Graham Klyne                    MIMEsweeper Group
Strategic Research              <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
      /\ \
     /  \ \
    / /\ \ \
   / / /\ \ \
  / / /__\_\ \
/ / /________\
Received on Wednesday, 12 December 2001 23:49:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:53:54 UTC