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

Re: questions about rdfs:Datatype [Was: RE: Seeking normative definition of datatyping]

From: Roland Schwaenzl <Roland.Schwaenzl@mathematik.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 23:10:23 +0100 (MET)
Message-Id: <200212052210.XAA12597@scarlett.mathematik.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE>
To: roland@mathematik.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE, phayes@ai.uwf.edu
Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org


> From phayes@ai.uwf.edu Thu Dec  5 18:05 MET 2002
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> X-Sender: phayes@mail.coginst.uwf.edu
> Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:05:24 -0600
> To: Roland Schwaenzl <roland@mathematik.uni-osnabrueck.de>
> From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
> Subject: Re: questions about rdfs:Datatype [Was: RE: Seeking normative    
>    definition of datatyping]
> Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
> 
> 
> The direct answer to your question is that they would, or could, 
> generate potentially infinitely many conclusions, formed by adding 
> '.0' at the end and any number of leading zeros at the beginning, of 
> the lexical string. 

That is what i figured ...


> Obviously it would be more practical to restrict 
> the use of the rules to a mode where the number of conclusions 
> generated were restricted. 

Sure


> For example, it would be fine, in 
> practice, to always use them so as to replace any lexical form 
> representing a decimal by its canonical form with all irrelevant 
> zeros suppressed. Whenever there is such a canonical lexical form, 
> restricting the rules so as to generate only that canonical form will 
> always find identities in at most two steps.

That one would be allowed to do...so why not suggest 
to procede that way (at least) in the xsd primitive case in RDF Sema?

[By the way: Why RDF Sema stresses "primitive" as opposed to "built in"?]


> 
> As you probably know, dealing with equations when performing 
> inferences is always somewhat computationally fraught, since true 
> equations can often generate infinitely many correct but silly 
> conclusions.

Sure -  


> These equations - which is what these rules are, in 
> effect - are no exception.

As you say...

Thanks again.

rs
> 
> Pat Hayes
> -- 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
> 40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
> Pensacola              			(850)202 4440   fax
> FL 32501           				(850)291 0667    cell
> phayes@ai.uwf.edu	          http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
> s.pam@ai.uwf.edu   for spam
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 5 December 2002 17:10:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:31 GMT