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

Re: simplified datatyping proposal

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 10:38:39 +0200
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@mimesweeper.com>
CC: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B89A7EAF.F34B%patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
On 2002-02-20 19:41, "ext Pat Hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu> wrote:


> Can I ask y'all for some clarification. Do people want to support
> BOTH in-line and bnode forms at the same time? That is, should the
> following mean the same thing and be affected in the same way by a
> drange assertion on ex:age ??:
> (1)
> person:Jenny ex:age "10" .
> (2)
> person:Jenny ex:age _:x .
> _:x rdfs:dlex "10" .

Yes.

> As things are at present, (1) means that Jenny's age is a character
> string, no matter what else you say, whereas (2) says her age is
> something that can be described by a character string, so can be
> modified by other datatyping. We can change this, as I say, but only
> at a cost.

It depends on how much of the datatyping interpretation is
intended to be captured in the graph.

If we agree that a literal denotes a literal always, and at
some level above the graph, we may determine based on the
combination of a literal and a datatype that the literal is
string equal with a lexical form that denotes a value, great.

But we don't then have to say that the literal node *denotes*
the value. It still denotes the literal.

Datatyping interpretation can happen above the graph. The
knowledgeg necessary to make those interpretations consistently
and unambiguously is captured in the graph. And in the graph,
a literal always denotes a literal.

Where is the problem?

Cheers,

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 Thursday, 21 February 2002 03:37:08 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:45:18 EDT