Re: How do RDF and Formal Logic fit together?

[Thomas B. Passin]
> I don't mean to suggest your approach does not have merit, but I take it
> that the bigger questions of whether RDF should have a datatyping system at
> all, and whether literal should be able to be targets of statements (or
> alternatively be allowed at all) seem to more the subject of these threads.

Mea culpa for the thread although Sandro started a new one that deals
with RDF and Logic and not specific with literals. But anyway the
subject is deriving and if this exchange should continue here it would
be in another thread. In fact it is more related to general semantic web
issues and not only restricted to RDF.

[Thomas B. Passin] 
> So basically, your approach would supply tyoe information either by adorning
> the literal value or by using special properties, is that right?  To me,
> this amounts to adding a datatyping system to RDF, one of a number of
> candidates.  Restricting the "slot" - or property, I suppose - to require
> certain data types like dates means applying constraints to a template, but
> RDF does not have native templates.

Final remark:
You are right here but not for the terms " Restricting" and " require" I
would have said "allow" in both. I prefer thinking in terms of
"hints" for services handling the basic information this gives us better
perspectives of future evolutions.


Ronald Poell