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

Re: A very short list of residual datatyping issues (just one ;-)

From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 16:56:42 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020313165217.03a65060@joy.songbird.com>
To: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Cc: ext Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 10:06 AM 3/13/02 +0200, Patrick Stickler wrote:
> > At 01:03 PM 3/12/02 +0200, Patrick Stickler wrote:
> >> 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 is addressed/allowed by the latest datatyping proposal [1], in the 
> form:
> >
> >   ex:Jenny ex:age "10" .
> >   ex:age rdfs:drange datatype:decimal .
>
>You missed my point, Graham. I was concerned with generic application
>of rdfs:range constraints by RDFS Validators having no special knowledge
>of datatypes.
>
>Obviously, I'm quite aware of the functionality of rdfs:drange.

Yes, I missed your point.

Let me see if I get it now.  Given:

     Bob age "35" .
     age rdfs:range datatype:decimal .

you say there is a range type inconsistency?

I agree that there is an inconsistency here.  I don't agree that it is a 
problem.  Effectively, by saying that:

     age rdfs:range datatype:decimal .

(and assuming that the value space of datatype:decimal does not include 
literal values) then I think you are saying that literals should not be 
used with this property.

#g


-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Wednesday, 13 March 2002 12:07:46 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:46:17 EDT