W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > July 2002

Re: Input sought on datatyping tradeoff

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 14:35:13 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20020712142816.06342a50@15.144.25.13>
To: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@openhealth.org>, <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
Cc: <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>, "patrick hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>

At 08:53 12/07/2002 -0400, Jonathan Borden wrote:

[...]

>That is if I know:
>
><jenny> <age> "10"
>
>no later information should change that fact or interpretation of that fact.

Yup.

[...]

> >
> > It is not possible to have the answers to Tests A and Test D both be
> > yes.  Either the A's can be yes or D can be yes, but not both.  We have to
> > decide which of these is the most important to have.
>
>why not? surely this is what the model theory is for, to _understand_ what
>that the <rdfs:range> property has a magic meaning.

Because the A tests have no range constraint.  We either have to decide 
that literals are self denoting - they always denote themselves in which 
case the answer to D must be NO, or there denotation depends on a range 
constraint in which case the answer to A must be NO.


>one could have two different types of equality -- string eq and value equal

Yes.  We are talking about value-eq here.

[...]


>note that "value-equal" might be non-monotonic if the <rdfs:range> propery
>got detatched from the other triples

that would not be non-monotonic - if you remove a triple then of course you 
are free to remove some inferences that depend on it.  My understanding of 
non monotonicity is that you must never withdraw an inference because of 
adding new triples.

Brian
Received on Friday, 12 July 2002 09:36:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:42 GMT