W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > January 2002

FW: TDL

From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 23:43:59 +0200
To: <www-archive@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B87F873F.CE35%patrick.stickler@nokia.com>

--
               
Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com


------ Forwarded Message
From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 23:29:47 +0200
To: ext Roland Schwaenzl <Roland.Schwaenzl@mathematik.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE>
Cc: <roland@scarlett.mathematik.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE>
Subject: Re: TDL

On 2002-01-31 22:46, "ext Roland Schwaenzl"
<Roland.Schwaenzl@mathematik.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE> wrote:


> Would something like <rdf:Description rdf:about="urn:xy:11">
>                    <rdf:type
> rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer"/>
>                    <rdf:value>3</rdf:value>
>                    </rdf:Description>
> 
> make sense to you?

I'm not sure.

Are you saying that "urn:xy:11" is some
form of URV  (e.g. like a 'tdl:') where 'xy' is
an integer datatype that takes base 2 lexical forms
(i.e. binary '11' = decimal '3')?

While it may seem reasonable to say that the specified
URI denotes an xsd:integer value 3, the lexical properties
of the (presumed) datatype xy are not compatible with
those of xsd:integer so some folks may find the
"dualistic" statement troublesome.

It would perhaps be better, and clearer, to define
an rdfs:subClassOf relation between 'xy' and xsd:integer
to express that the value space of 'xy' is a subset
(possibly perfect intersection) of the value space
of xsd:integer, but that their lexical spaces do not
intersect.

I.e.

<rdf:Description rdf:about="urn:xy:11">
  <rdf:type rdf:resource="#xy"/>
  <rdf:value>11</rdf:value>
</rdf:Description>

<rdf:Description rdf:about="#xy">
   <rdfs:subClassOf
rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer"/>
</rdf:Description>

I think, though, I understand what you are trying to do,
and insofar as the TDL model is concerned, the presence
of a URIref label on the node holding the local idiom
properties is not regarded when determining the TDL
pairing -- so we end up with (xsd:integer, "3") dispite
the URI corresponding to (xv,"11"). Now, whether or not
that will cause problems, I can't say. I'll have to let
it percolate in my subconscious for a bit ;-)

Attached is an ontology that I cooked up for capturing
lexical datatype relations. It was included in one earlier
draft of TDL, but was dropped out for the sake of keeping
the tightest focus on the actual model rather than any
periphery, however useful. You may have caught in in one
of the earlier drafts, but if not, maybe you will find
it interesting. I've anyway made a few refinements to it
since then...

Cheers,

Patrick

--
               
Patrick Stickler              Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist     Fax:   +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center         Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com


------ End of Forwarded Message




Received on Thursday, 31 January 2002 16:42:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:17:16 GMT