- From: Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>
- Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 16:12:56 +0100
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Le 10/11/2011 17:33, Alex Hall a écrit : > On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Richard Cyganiak<richard@cyganiak.de>wrote: > >> Antoine, >> >> On 10 Nov 2011, at 14:41, Antoine Zimmermann wrote: >>> This resource can only be known according to a datatype map and only if >> the datatype map contains a pair (http://ex.com/whatever,ddd). Otherwise, >> it is unknown. >> >> Can you confirm that this is really an “if and only if”? >> >> Is it somehow possible under RDFS-Entailment + D-Entailment to get a value >> for "foo"^^bar if bar is not in the datatype map? >> >>> The text should rather say something like: >>> >>> "If<x,ddd> is not in the datatype map then a typed literal with >> datatype IRI x is interpreted as an unknown resource." >> >> Would it be correct to say the following: >> “The value of a literal whose datatype IRI is not in the datatype map is >> unknown.” >> > > That's almost exactly what RDF Semantics 2004 says: "Typed literals whose > type is not in the datatype map of the interpretation are treated as > before, i.e. as denoting some unknown thing." (Section 5.1) Right, in fact, it would be good not to say "the value" when the literal denotes some unknown resource. > > I would prefer to have literals of type rdf:LangString denote themselves in > all interpretations rather than some unknown thing, but I don't know how > best to make it happen. Clearly it can't be done through the L2V mechanism. There is not problem defining a specific interpretation for some datatypes, just like what is done for rdf:XMLLiteral (or xsd:string in RDF 1.1). > > -Alex > -- Antoine Zimmermann ISCOD / LSTI - Institut Henri Fayol École Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Saint-Étienne 158 cours Fauriel 42023 Saint-Étienne Cedex 2 France Tél:+33(0)4 77 42 66 03 Fax:+33(0)4 77 42 66 66 http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/
Received on Monday, 14 November 2011 15:13:22 UTC