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

Re: Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com, patrick.stickler@nokia.com, jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com, jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 10:25:47 +0200
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
CC: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B87ECC2B.CCCB%patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
On 2002-01-30 19:29, "ext Pat Hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu> wrote:


>> 1. In section 0.2, you say a graph has "urirefs, literal nodes and blank
>> nodes". Should this actually read "uriref nodes"? As later in the paragaph
>> you say that a uriref may "also be a node in the graph". So is a uriref
>> a node and an arc label, or just a label of an arc or node? You also
>> use both "literal node" and "literal". Is O a literal node or the actual
>> string?
> 
> It is correct as stated, but obviously unclear. I have add some
> sentences of explanation, to make it clear that this is not a typo.

Sorry if I implied it wasn't correct. I agree it is. It was just
(potentially) confusing as in some cases it suggests a uriref *is*
the node and in other cases it implies it is a label *on* a node.
But it's no show stopper.

>> Thus, neither
>> TDL nor S (nor any datatyping scheme which does not provide native
>> internalized representations for all values) can ensure entailment
>> of the actual values -- only of string equality, which may or
>> may not be useful. Eh?]
> 
> Well, it may not be useful, but that's not the MT's problem. If
> literals denote strings, then that's what they denote. If you wanna
> talk about values, you have to write some more triples, right?

Quite.

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, 31 January 2002 03:24:43 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:44:04 EDT