Patrick Stickler wrote: >>Why does the MT *need* to make the triple drawn to the LexicalNode >>invalid in prescence of a range constraint ? >> >> > >Because the range assertion says that the object of the property >is a member of the particular class, and in the case of a datatype >class, its RDF Class extension is the value space. And a lexical >node is not a datatype value, but a string. > It seems to me that the MT's range entailments cannot be applied to LexicalNodes at all. This is because however hard we try we simply could not draw the arrow {uuu [rdfs:type] zzz } as prescribed by the entailment rule [rdfs3] in the case where uuu is a LexicalNode. Since we cannot draw an arrow from a LexicalNode, I propose to change [rdfs3] to exclude such an erronous entailment .... something like I have depicted in my new diagram [3]. [3] http://robustai.net/mentography/jenny_mt_rdfs3.jpg I think this works if you'all consider a LexicalNode not to be or rdf:type rdfs:Resource. Do you? ... and could the MT be changed as I propose? ... and would that solve your concern above? .... and thanks for your comments in my blog :-) . Seth Russell http://radio.weblogs.com/0113759/Received on Thursday, 26 September 2002 12:11:17 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 18:22:13 GMT
