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

Re: model theory and literals

From: <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 00:45:58 +0100
To: phayes@ai.uwf.edu
Cc: Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <OF01E19BC4.86BBB3D3-ON41256AE1.0080C0DB@bayer-ag.com>

>>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
>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2001OctDec/0057.html
>). 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.

we consider them as identities which can be unified
in a very straightforward way (and actually also in
subject and predicate roles)

--
Jos
Received on Wednesday, 10 October 2001 18:46:29 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:41:00 EDT