W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > February 2001

Re: rdf:value backwards? [was: a few issues...]

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 11:05:55 -0600
Message-Id: <v04210100b6b853dde853@[205.160.76.203]>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, sandro@w3.org, www-rdf-logic@w3.org, www-rdf-comments@w3.org
>pat hayes wrote:
>[...]
> > This is supposed to be saying that a string  has something as its
> > linguistic 'value', but the value comes first. In other words, it's
> > saying that the string is a NAME for the thing. So how about
> > rdf:nameIs, or (since this is being used with an equality sign which
> > conveys the 'is' already) rdf:nameOf or rdf:nameFor ?
>
>The closest W3C-Recommended precedent I can think of
>is rdfs:label; is that close enough?
>
>i.e. traditional-kr:Thing is to rdf:Resource
>as traditional-kr:Name is to rdfs:label.
>
>Perhaps it's best to exploit that precedent,
>but make a new name for this specialized use:
>
>	:lexRep a daml:UnambiguousProperty;
>		rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:label;
>		rdfs:domain xsd:anySimpleType;
>		rdfs:range xsd:string.

That seems OK. I kind of dislike having to switch from use to mention 
every time I see 'lexRep', but I guess I'm going to have to get used 
to this.

Pat

---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
phayes@ai.uwf.edu 
http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Tuesday, 20 February 2001 12:04:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:38 GMT