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

Re: Oh my GOD, another datatype document.

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 16:46:16 +0200
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B885BCD8.D40C%patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
On 2002-02-05 1:32, "ext Pat Hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu> wrote:


> ... but the discussion is confused because the Ntriples
> *syntax* is ambiguous when literal nodes are not tidy.

Then, as a step towards resolution, let's agree that literals are
tidy. It doesn't break S. It doesn't break the fundamental core
of TDL (though the TDL MT would have to give up any notion of
the literal denoting a mapping, and there anyway seem to be
ways to address that in the TDL MT).

Let's agree that a literal is a literal -- and for any given
literal there is one and only one literal node -- and whether
that literal contributes to some interpretation that provides a
typed value, and how that happens, is the real issue at hand.

Note! This still does not mean that "untidyness" does not have to
be dealt with properly. It does. But we just agree that we won't
deal with it via untidy literals, but by some other mechanism
either in the graph or in the MT.

Does this make things easier for everyone?

Are you OK with such a convergence, Jeremy?

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 Tuesday, 5 February 2002 09:45:52 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:45:05 EDT