W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > April 2002

Re: Denotation of datatype values

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 10:36:34 +0300
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
CC: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B8E5A3B2.13764%patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
On 2002-04-19 0:17, "ext Pat Hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu> wrote:


>> Not having a bnode to denote the value is not, IMO, being sloppy.
> 
> What I meant is that if you (the user) are interested in lexical
> checking but want to be deliberately underspecified concerning
> datatype values, you have that option.

I consider this to be nonsensical. There is no difference in datatyping
precision between any of the idioms. They all identify datatype values.
I think where we disagree is whether something that does not have
explicit denotation in the graph can be provided for by the MT.

I see no reason why not. But then, I'm not a mathematician. I see
the MT as telling me unambiguously, for every inline idiom with
an associated datatype, the specific datatype value (or how to
obtain it by an application that groks the datatype).

That is what matters to me. Getting to the datatype value. In some
applications, having explicit denotation for the datatype value
in the graph is useful or even necessary, and such needs will
direct the selection of other idioms than the inline idiom, or
transformation from the inline idiom to another idiom. But in
all cases, a single specific datatype value is identified.

Patrick

--
               
Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
Received on Friday, 19 April 2002 03:40:24 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:47:33 EDT