On 2002-02-04 17:52, "ext Damian Steer" <D.M.Steer@lse.ac.uk> wrote: > TDL's method, which doesn't require those clauses, appears much more > troublesome. <"0.0",0> != <"0",0> is a typical problem. This is a problem with all datatyping proposals that RDF could consider, since RDF cannot escape non-canonical lexical forms and thus more than one lexical form can denote the same value in for a given datatype. > This is hardly an original thought (it was discussed on Friday), but > could somebody explain why TDL does this? I can see hope for the > 'almost a function' approach, but not for the lexical-value pairs. Well, not to disparage Jeremy's efforts at providing an MT for TDL (which I am not capable of doing and for which I am very very grateful to Jeremy for his contributions), the particular approach he took, that of the lexical-value pairing, is not exactly the same as the basic concept behind TDL, which is more I think along the lines of your 'almost a function' approach, and pairs the lexical form (literal) with the URI of the datatype as a basis for interpretation rather than a lexical form and a value. Cheers, Patrick -- Patrick Stickler Phone: +358 50 483 9453 Senior Research Scientist Fax: +358 7180 35409 Nokia Research Center Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.comReceived on Monday, 4 February 2002 12:25:31 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:41 GMT