Re: changes to be made to 5 Mar version of Semantics

On Mar 6, 2013, at 12:53 PM, Peter Patel-Schneider wrote:

> Changes for FPWD
> 

Do you have a personal homepage, or a FOAF URI I can use to link to you?
> ...
> - value space of datatypes - change to conform with Concepts
>   - remove sentence about the value space

? I thought it did conform with Concepts, and which sentence are you referring to? 
I may have already made this change without realizing it, so check new wording there. 

> 
> - well-typed literal - can literals from unrecognized datatypes be well-typed?
>   A literal whose datatype is recognized but is not ill-typed is well-typed.

I will simply abandon the terminology "well-typed" altogether, it is too confusing and not needed.  Done.

>   
> 
> Changes to be made (not necessarily for FPWD):
> ....
> * datatype map - not useful here

I put it back in because I thought you wanted it there. :-)  But I agree, so...done.

>   , where D is a set of IRIs that constitute the recognized datatypes.
>   IRIs listed in Concepts Section 5 must be interpreted as described there,
>   and the IRI ...
>   When other datatypes are used, the interpretation of the recognized
>   datatype IRIs must be specified unambiguously.
> 
> - datatype extensions
>   - need to add something about if the datatypes are interpreted the same way
> 
> - status of rdf:langString
> 
> - I think that the RDFS semantic conditions should be made  less redundant

Some of this done. Im not yet convinced about the IC and IP parts. 

>   - remove IL(E) is in LV, for every well-typed literal E
>   * currently unrecognized literals are well-typed, which makes the above
>     condition non-redundant AND a change to the semantics AND destroys
>     semantic extensibility

Fixed

>   - status of rdf:langString
>   - remove "x and y are in IP" for rdfs:subPropertyOf
>   - remove "x and y are in IC" for rdfs:subClassOf
> 
> * value space of datatypes
>   - remove "ICEXT(I(aaa)) = { ... }"
> 
> 
> Changes to be made to Concepts
> 
> - definition of rdf:langString as a datatype with a trivial L2V

?Is this necessary? I think we are OK just saying that its a datatype IRI with a value space. 

> 
> - remove datatype maps - not used in semantics

And, define bnode scopes :-)

Pat


> 

------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   
40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes

Received on Thursday, 7 March 2013 17:21:33 UTC