W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > July to September 2002

Re: Datatyping

From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 07:19:12 -0700
Message-ID: <3D95BA60.3080005@robustai.net>
To: "www-rdf-comments@w3.org" <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>

Brian McBride wrote:

 > At 05:43 24/09/2002 -0700, Seth Russell wrote:
 > [...]
 >> In that graph, Jenny's age is not identical to John's age, yet I
 >> would like the MT to entail that equality.
 >> In that graph, John's age is identical to the title of movie B, yet I
 >> would like the MT to entail that John's age is not equal the title of
 >> movie B.
 > Hi Seth,
 > Are these requirements based on your judgement of what would be "good"
 > behaviour or are they based on real application requirements.  I'd
 > love to hear about the latter.

It is based on  my judgement taking into consideration some of the prior
judgements of the WG.   These are my reconsidered answers to the
questions you  asked some time ago in [1],  please change my vote
accordingly.   I need to know how datatyping is going to work before I
implement it in sailor [2].  Sailor has a method called "sameNodeAs"
which is the test  for syntactic identity.  Currently sailor has no
notion of equality, it has only this notion of syntactic identity.   I
want to add the ability of sailors to navigate the value space,  to
navigate the lexical space, and to know the difference.   Note, that in
my proposed soultion all three things:  ten as a string, ten as a
integer, and  the lexical  "10" (which is neither of the former)  show
up in the domain of discourse - see  the graph [3].   Also please note
that the lexical space is tidy.  I want to model things just like Sergey
does - see [4].

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2002Jul/0045.html
[2] http://robustai.net/sailor/
[3] http://robustai.net/mentography/jennyAge10_2.gif
[4] http://robustai.net/mentography/jenny_rich_types.gif

 > With regard to entailing not equal, RDF doesn't really have negation.
 > Perhaps you meant "does not not entail ... is equal ..."

Right,  I meant "does not not entail ... is equal ...".

... thanks for the dialogue.

Seth Russell
Received on Saturday, 28 September 2002 10:19:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:15:18 UTC