RE: RDF Datatyping Working Draft

Patrick,

if I have understood your comments about datatype interpretation correctly
then I believe that:

----

<ex:age> <rdfd:range> <xsd:integer> .
<Jane> <ex:age> "25" .

datatype entails

<Jane> <ex:age> _:b .
_:b <xsd:integer> "25" .


---

something that Pat seemed to shy away from saying in section 5.

This continues to worry me because then in something like webont or DAML we
can't say that ex:age has a unique value, because <Jane> has two really
different ages: 25 the integer (i.e. the same age as <John> and <Judy>) and
"25" the string (i.e the same as the <bar> of <foo>).


The positive suggestions I intend to list as alternatives for escaping the
problems I see are:
- don't do datatyping
- drop tidy literals and don't have any model theory for datatyping
- drop tidy literals and don't support the datateype property idiom (aka
S-A)
- don't support the inline idiom (aka S-B)
- drop tidy literals and buy Pat's sophistry
[[[
These two forms - the single triple with a literal as object, and the
similar triple with a bnode as object, together with a lexical form triple
linking the bnode to the literal - are identical in meaning and can be
substituted freely for one another.
]]]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Feb/0614.html

I strongly prefer the last of these, and remain convinced that the costs of
the current proposal in terms of loss of monotonicity or loss of mono-valued
functions is unacceptable.

Please remember the process no longer requires my points to be addressed
(unless at the director's insistence). It is, IMO, more important to produce
a document for the community to see than to address my concerns.

Jeremy

(complete kb:)
> <John> <ex:age> _:x .
> _:x <xsd:integer> "25" .
> <Judy> <ex:age> _:y .
> _:y <rdfd:lex> "25" .
> <ex:age> <rdfd:range> <xsd:integer> .
> <Jane> <ex:age> "25" .
> <foo> <bar> "25" .
> <bar>  <rdfd:range> <xsd:string> .

Received on Thursday, 4 April 2002 06:39:45 UTC