On 2002-03-11 19:58, "ext Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com> wrote: >> b) The present proposal does not provide any means of using >> rdfs:range to constrain the values of datatyped properties >> without resulting in the inability to use both global or >> local idioms freely and without conflict. > > Thats issue 2, but I don't know what it means. Test case please. I provided some N3 during the f2f, but here is one again... Taking the present proposed interpretation that a datatype URI denotes only its value space: Given age rdfs:range xsd:integer . Then Bob age [ a xsd:integer; xsd:integer "35" ] . works OK, since the bNode is a member of the value space of xsd:integer; but Bob age "35" . generates a range constraint conflict since "35" is a member of the lexical space, not value space of xsd:integer. This problem does not exist with a union interpretation. Patrick -- Patrick Stickler Phone: +358 50 483 9453 Senior Research Scientist Fax: +358 7180 35409 Nokia Research Center Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.comReceived on Tuesday, 12 March 2002 06:01:29 EST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:46:16 EDT