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

RE: test case A revisited

From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 14:44:37 +0100 (BST)
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
cc: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0207011443440.28623-100000@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

On Mon, 1 Jul 2002, Jeremy Carroll wrote:

>
> > Consider
> >
> >    _:b1 rdf:type rdf:Seq .
> >    _:b1 rdf:_1   "10" .
> >    _:b2 rdf:type rdf:Seq .
> >    _:b2 rdf:_1   "10" .
> >
> > This would require that the first member of each sequence is the same.
> >
>
> My take is that global datatyping and containers of literals simply do not
> interoperate.
> Containers with literal values either are untyped or locally typed.
>
> I don't believe that any of the proposed global datatyping solutions (ever) work
> with containers.
>
> Hence I think:
>
> + test case A is a choice (the group seems minded to say that the entailment
> holds - I disagree but not strongly).
>
> + containers cannot contain globally typed literals (i.e. the literals are
> either self-denoting or untyped)
>
> + if test case A is true then rdf:object takes untyped literals as its object
> (Brian also mentioned the rdf:object problem in the telecon).

This is presumably an arguable benefit of having container machinery
darkened? (And reification vocabulary, possibly) : ie, that bogus type
inferences aren't drawn by accident.

-- 
jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/
Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 RFC822 jan.grant@bris.ac.uk
Goth isn't dead, it's just lying very still and sucking its cheeks in.
Received on Monday, 1 July 2002 09:44:47 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:49:48 EDT