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

Re: "meaningless terms" verbage for Primer

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:14:57 +0200
Message-ID: <013701c2a03d$5f60bde0$7480720a@NOE.Nokia.com>
To: "ext Jan Grant" <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
Cc: "fmanola" <fmanola@mitre.org>, "w3c-rdfcore-wg" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>



[Patrick Stickler, Nokia/Finland, (+358 40) 801 9690, patrick.stickler@nokia.com]


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "ext Jan Grant" <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
To: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Cc: "fmanola" <fmanola@mitre.org>; "w3c-rdfcore-wg" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Sent: 10 December, 2002 12:38
Subject: Re: "meaningless terms" verbage for Primer


> On Tue, 10 Dec 2002, Patrick Stickler wrote:
> 
> > If there is no machine interpretable interpretation, then IMO
> > there is no interpretation whatsoever. Eh?
> 
> This seems to be a persuasive argument for dropping language tags.

I don't follow. Though the language tags do not affect the
denotation of typed literals, they have consistent and unambiguous
interpretation by machines (even if that interpretation is
disjuct from the datatyping interpretation of the typed literal.

On the other hand, if some term has no consistent machine
interpretation, in any way, at any level, then it is useless
as part of a solution for the global interchange of knowledge
for which RDF is supposed to serve as a foundational component.

No?

Patrick
Received on Tuesday, 10 December 2002 06:27:31 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:54:50 EDT