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

Re: 2002-04-16 RDF Datatyping WD submitted for review by WG

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 18:36:06 -0500
Message-Id: <p0510154fb8e657f47585@[65.217.30.94]>
To: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>On 2002-04-19 1:54, "ext Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>  [...]
>>
>>>  PS How about rdfd:datatypeCheckOnPointyEnd.... Nah.
>>
>>  rdfd:dcrange sounds neutral
>>  (at least when thinking about dc as datatype checked ;-)
>
>I would not like to see 'range' in the property name, since
>it is not the assertion of the property that is constraining
>the interpretation, it is the semantics of the datatype,
>and the association of the datatype can be done in two
>ways, either globally by association with a property or
>locally by the explicit datatype property, but in either
>case, it is the datatype that asserts the constraints.

Oh, I see. Hmmm, I think that reasoning is slightly misleading, 
actually, since the *constraint* strictly speaking is applied - 
asserted, if you like -  by our semantic conditions, not by the 
datatype. (The datatype is just a piece of mathematics as far as the 
semantics is concerned.)

I actually do like having something that sounds slightly "range"-ish 
in order to convey that it is being applied at the sharp end of the 
property (the object not the subject of the triple), but maybe that 
is just a private obsession.

>I think that rdfd:datatype and rdfd:RDFDatatype communicate
>most accurately the semantics and are sufficiently different
>to avoid upper/lower case typos or confusion.

I guess I don't like using 'datatype' (the noun) for the property 
associating a datatype to the arguments of a property. One can read 
rdfs:range as "....has a range which is....", and similarly for 
rdfs:domain, rdf:type, etc. , so to me  rdfd:datatype tends to read 
like "...has a datatype which is...."  which is misleading, since 
this doesn't attach a datatype to the *property*, so much as kind of 
empower it to attach it to its objects.

rdfd:objectDatatype ??  Nah..... I'll try again later, I seem to have 
lost my naming inspiration.

Pat
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
phayes@ai.uwf.edu 
http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Friday, 19 April 2002 19:36:10 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:47:34 EDT