>"Peter F. Patel-Schneider" wrote: >> >> I am concerned that this model theory locks RDF into a particular >> way of interpreting literals, namely that the interpretation of a literal >> can be completely determined from its label, using a fixed mapping to >> literal values. > >I believe this is by design. It's an important requirement on >RDF syntax that it be "context free"... i.e. that this >level of meaning is syntactically evident. Context free, right, but that 'syntactically evident' may depend on more than a simple label, as far as the model theory is concerned. The MT is (deliberately) agnostic about the exact nature of lexical items in any particular lexicalization. Pat >Hmm... I thought this requirement was pretty well documented, >but I don't see it in > http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-rdf-syntax-19990222/ > > >-- >Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/~phayesReceived on Thursday, 27 September 2001 23:52:15 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C0.50 : Wednesday, 11 January 2006 15:19:09 GMT