RE: Datatyping Summary

> Ok Jeremy,
>
> As I understand what you are suggesting here, is that under TDL, the rule
> could be rewritten to get the desired effect, i.e. reflecting the
> "literal
> is a pair" directly in an extended n-triples represention:
>
>    <mary> <haircolor> (_, "red") .
>
> and
>
>    ?x <haircolor> (_, "red") => ?x <rdf:type> <redhead> .
>
> one can conclude:
>
>    ?x <rdf:type> <redhead> .
>

Yes.
I think this is a clear articulation of one approach to Dan's problem in
TDL.