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

RE: Datatyping literals: question and test cases

From: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 16:52:54 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021029165217.032ad140@127.0.0.1>
To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: "RDF core WG" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

Thanks, I'll advise CC/PP accordingly.

I just realized I have another question:  are all instances of 
rdfs:Datatype also rdfs:subClasseOf rdfs:Literal?

i.e.

   _:x rdf:type rdfs:Datatype
entails
   _:x rdfs:subClasseOf rdfs:Literal

?

(This was not mentioned in Brian's note [1] on RDF schema.)

#g
--

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Oct/0442.html

At 04:51 PM 10/29/02 +0100, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
> > I also understand that, following DanC's requests,
> >
> >    _:x ex:prop "foo" .
> >    ex:prop rdfs:range xsd:string .
> >
> > will be satisfiable in conformance with xsd:string datatypeconstraints.
>
>No decision - the current drafts say NO.
>
>Concepts say a literal is a pair.
>Ntriples says "foo" goes to "foo"-""
>Model theory says untyped literals are self-denoting.
>
>"foo"-"" is not an xsd:string.
>
> >
> > But, what about this:
> >
> >    _:x ex:prop "http://example.org/" .
> >    ex:prop rdfs:range xsd:anyURI .
>
>Similarly, currently this is a NO.
>
> >
> > #g
> > --
> >
> > PS:  in my subject line, I say "test cases", which these are strictly
> > not.
>
>They could be made so by the invention of a new test case.
>
>Jeremy

-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Tuesday, 29 October 2002 12:07:16 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:52:33 EDT