RE: Datatyping, text case

Sorry

I missed this earlier.

I hope it is now irrelevant, but here is an answer anyway.

Assuming we allow URIs to map to values as well as resources then you could
declare both a domain and range cosntraint on ex:succ and this would work as
well as any other datatyping proposal.

You also need to say something about the uniqueness or unambiguity of
ex:succ, which you can't do in RDF - you need webont.

Jeremy

> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-rdfcore-wg-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-rdfcore-wg-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Graham Klyne
> Sent: 01 February 2002 12:04
> To: Jeremy Carroll; RDF core WG
> Subject: Datatyping, text case
>
>
> Jeremy,
>
> I think your revised TDL model theory addresses the big self-entailment
> problem, but I'm still concerned by the interaction between the
> denotation
> of literals as pairs, and the denotation of other nodes which nominally
> mean the same thing.  Basically, I'm not sure I understand how that is
> meant to work.
>
> So here are a couple of test cases to prime the discussion:
>
> Does this:
>    ex:zero rdf:value "0" .
>    ex:one ex:succ ex:zero .
>    _:one ex:succ ex:zero .
>    _:one rdf:value "1" .
> entail this:
>    ex:one rdf:value "1" .
> ?
>
> Or does:
>    ex:one ex:succ "0" .
>    _:one ex:succ "0" .
>    _:one rdf:value "1" .
> entail:
>    ex:one rdf:value "1" .
> ?
>
> In each case, the short answer is fairly clearly "no".  So the real
> question is:  what else do I have to say, or what assumptions must I make
> about the nature of ex:succ.  Intuitively, ex:succ would conform to:
>
>     IEXT(I(ex:succ)) = { <0,1>, <1,2>, <2,3>, ... etc. }
>
> (I took a look at DanC's
> www.w3.org/2001/03swell/pra.n3http://www.w3.org/2001/03swell/pra.n3 for
> some clues, but couldn't really get any traction on it.)
>
> #g
>
>
> --------------------------
>         __
>        /\ \    Graham Klyne
>       /  \ \   (GK@ACM.ORG)
>      / /\ \ \
>     / / /\ \ \
>    / / /__\_\ \
>   / / /________\
>   \/___________/
>
>
>