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

Re: Comments on ioctl (was: Re: big issue (2001-09-28#13))

From: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@upclink.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 08:11:55 -0500
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
To: Martyn Horner <martyn.horner@profium.com>
Message-Id: <0C2A3E4F-BBEE-11D5-B233-003065D5CE46@upclink.com>
On Monday, October 8, 2001, at 08:02  AM, Martyn Horner wrote:

> Maybe I missed something in the argument but does `denotation' 
> distinguish between numerals (literals) denoting numbers and 
> numerals (literals) denoting, say, dates. So the literal 
> "20001225" has, at least, two denotations? Does this invalidate 
> this definition? Do you mean `unique denotation'? If you don't, 
> how does this definition stay valid?

It's my belief that the literal "20001225" denotes itself, and 
properties like :creationDate are really shorthand for 
:creationDateStringInXXXForm .

--
[ "Aaron Swartz" ; <mailto:me@aaronsw.com> ; <http://www.aaronsw.com/> ]
Received on Monday, 8 October 2001 09:11:59 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:40:58 EDT