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

Re: ACTION 2001-08-24#9 : issues with containers

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2001 10:45:36 -0500
Message-ID: <3B93A5A0.649051C3@w3.org>
To: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
CC: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, w3c-rdfcore-wg <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Jan Grant wrote:
[...]
> While I have held, in principle, what I'd characterise as DanC's opinion
> here (or the more extreme version: "alt is totally broken")

I'm not saying it's broken; I'm just saying it's not magic.
It's very mundane; from the MT perspective,
it means no more or less than any
other class (Apple, Bananna, Integer, ...).

> - that is,
> that an app can infer what it likes, an alt-unaware MT is going to
> produce an odd semantics for something like
> 
>      <doc1> <dc:creator> _:a .
>      _:a <rdf:type> <rdf:Alt> .
>      _:a <rdf:_1> <jan> .
>      _:a <rdf:_2> <dan> .
> 
> ("doc1 was written by either jan or dan") - I don't see how you can
> ignore alt in the MT and get this interpretation, no matter how you go
> about it.

I interpret that n-triples fragment not as "doc1 was written
by either jan or dan" but

  doc1's has a creator value which is a collection including
  jan and dan; this collection is the sort where folks conventionally
choose
  one from the collection, rather than using all of them.

Again, suppose the graph had a Bag rather than an Alt:

      <doc1> <dc:creator> _:a .
      _:a <rdf:type> <rdf:Bag> .
      _:a <rdf:_1> <jan> .
      _:a <rdf:_2> <dan> .

We don't license the inference that
	<doc1> <dc:creator> <jan>.
in that case, do we? No. Then why should rdf:Alt have any magic
associated with it?

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Monday, 3 September 2001 11:46:45 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:39:38 EDT