On Mon, 2002-01-28 at 03:11, Patrick Stickler wrote: > On 2002-01-25 19:22, "ext Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org> wrote: > [...] > > What's necessarily > > the case is that in S, "30" denotes the same thing in all > > interpretaions, but in TDL it doesn't. > > In TDL (though not perhaps the current TDL MT, which should > be revised) a literal is a literal is a literal. In the > graph, it simply is a string that, IFF paired with a datatype, > may be interpreted as a lexical form (a member of the lexical > space of that datatype). > > This is just as with S. > > However, I do disagree with the statement that "30" always > denotes the same thing in all interpretations -- as its > interpretation is context specific, either per a given > predicate or explicitly defined typing (local or global). I don't know how to have a conversation like this. I'm using the word "interpretation" in the technical sense of our model theory working draft. I can't make sense of "its interpretation is context specific". You seem to have switched to some informal use of the word "interpretation". -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/Received on Monday, 28 January 2002 08:40:46 EST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:44:01 EDT