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

Re: model theory and literals

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 16:46:06 -0500
Message-Id: <p0510104db7ea6ce16aff@[]>
To: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>Can I try to clarify what I think you're saying...
>Different occurrences of a literal within a graph may map to 
>different values, but that these mappings are fixed, and may not 
>change when a different interpretation is used for the graph.

Right, that is what I had in mind. However, Peter wants a slightly 
different notion, in which the interpretation *does* determine (or at 
any rate *can* determine) the literal mappings. This seems to amount 
to treating literals rather like bNodes with a kind of potential 
datatype constraint on them (that can be inferred from rdfs:range 
assertions in the graph, in Peter's scheme: see
). I have to say, I don't like this myself. But maybe I will have to 
just shut up and go along with the crowd.

>   [a Shoe] decimalSize [ a type:Integer ; rdf:value "10" ] ;
>            sizeLabel   [ a type:String ;  rdf:value "10" ] .
>The intent here is that the first occurrence is mapped to an 
>integer, and the second to a string.
>BUT, doesn't this depend in some way on the interpretation of 
>type:Integer and type:String?

Maybe. Actually I'm not sure how to parse that example. Is that two 
triples or four triples?

IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
Received on Wednesday, 10 October 2001 17:46:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:53:52 UTC