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

Re: Strange behaviour of datatypes test A1 with answer yes and literals untidy

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 22:35:06 -0400
Message-Id: <p05111b00b96a59e550d8@[]>
To: Drew McDermott <drew.mcdermott@yale.edu>
Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org

>    [Pat Hayes]
>    Brian has not published the full gory details behind his example.
>    Allow me to fill them in, so you can better appreciate the reasoning
>    involved here. But be warned, before reading further, that this may
>    corrupt your intuitions so badly that your opinions on the test cases
>    may become worthless.
>Too late!
>    We (the WG, that is) found ourselves caught unable to come to a clear
>    decision between the two extreme positions of complete tidyness
>    (literals are unique, have a fixed denotation) and complete
>    untidyiness (literals can mean anything, and different occurrences of
>    the same literal can mean different things.) So we have been trying
>    to find intermediate positions which capture the best of both worlds.
>    One of these positions (we have tried many of them) is the following:
>    literals are syntactically tidy (ie like urirefs, there can be only
>    one node per literal per graph) but semantically untidy, in that the
>    way that the literal is interpreted might depend on the triple in
>    which it is considered; in particular, it might be a function of the
>    pair consisting of the literal itself and  the property of the
>    triple. 
>Perhaps it's my corrupted intuitions, but it seems to me that
>syntactic tidiness is beside the point, merely a technical detail.  To
>be untidy is to be semantically untidy.

Well, yes, I now tend to agree, particularly after seeing the, shall 
I say, lack of universal acclaim which has greeted the ingenious 
attempts to get the best of both ideas.


IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
Received on Monday, 29 July 2002 10:11:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:38:24 UTC