- From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 17:34:09 +0000
- To: Graham Klyne <graham.klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
- CC: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>, Stephan Zednik <zednis@rpi.edu>, Provenance Working Group WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
Hi Graham, My very original idea was to use Strings for roles, because some (non-SW) users may just want to use a string to say "person". My second idea was also to allow URIs, which is what the SW people would have used. e.g. "foaf:person" Beyond roles, parameter positions may also be encoded as an index. Hence, the choice of typed literal. They do have fixed denotations. I felt this was enough. I still feel this is enough. The Prov-O team would have had the flexibility to translate a prov-dm Literal to whatever they felt appropriate. But feedback indicated that it was not. So, where are we standing on this? Luc On 11/10/2011 02:25 PM, Graham Klyne wrote: > On 06/11/2011 19:04, Paul Groth wrote: >> This is where the confusion is. Literals in RDF-speak are not URIs. >> Maybe a note in either prov-o or prov-dm would help clarify this. > > Yes. > > Referring to the model theoretic style of semantics used for RDF (and > also for formalizing first order logic - if DM is appealing to some > different semantic framework, this needs to be spelled out): > > Specifically literals have a fixed denotation. A plain string denotes > itself. In integer literal denotes the number determined according to > the numeric encoding scheme, a URI literal denotes a URI (*), etc... > > By contrast, names (i.e. URIs in RDF) denote whatever some > "interpretation" says they denote. This interpretation is just a > function from names to things, which is not fixed by the language. > The associated semantics (inherent and/or additionally defined) > constrain the interpretations that are considered valid (also known as > "models"). > > What this all means is that if something is a literal, you can't > arbitrary say it denotes the American president known as "Barack > Obama" (unless such a mapping is baked into an underlying literal > structure, which doesn't really make sense). > > Where this all leads is that I think the roles in DM should be names, > not literals. > > #g > -- > > (*) ... as opposed to a URI-node in RDF, which denotes whatever the > applicable interpretation says it denotes. > -- Professor Luc Moreau Electronics and Computer Science tel: +44 23 8059 4487 University of Southampton fax: +44 23 8059 2865 Southampton SO17 1BJ email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk United Kingdom http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm
Received on Thursday, 10 November 2011 17:34:47 UTC