Re: For RDF Concepts: term-equality and value-equality.

I've added some changes to this section that I think addresses everyone's concerns.  Please let me know.
  https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html

Regards,
Dave
--
http://about.me/david_wood



On May 8, 2013, at 11:23, Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> On 08/05/13 15:21, Sandro Hawke wrote:
>> On 05/08/2013 10:12 AM, Pat Hayes wrote:
>>> On May 7, 2013, at 4:13 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
>>> 
>>>> RDF Concepts says:
>>>> 
>>>> [[
>>>> Literal equality: Two literals are equal if and only if the two
>>>> lexical forms, the two datatype IRIs, and the two language tags (if
>>>> any) compare equal, character by character.
>>>> ]]
>>>> 
>>>> I think it would be useful to spell out "term equality" and "value
>>>> equality" as important concepts.
>>>> 
>>> Blech. I strongly dislike having "kinds" of equality. Equality has one
>>> meaning, and it does not admit of degrees or kinds. This is a
>>> difference between literals and literal values, not two kinds of
>>> equality. We already draw out the distinction between literals and
>>> literal values.
> 
> I don't see anything about testing values in concepts - I think it is useful in "concepts" to put literal equality and value testing close together.
> 
> The important point, which continues to confuse people, is that
> 
> "1"^^xs:integer
> "+1"^^xs:integer
> 
> are different terms.
> 
> How we express that, I don't mind.
> 
> Text way down in a modified 5.5 isn't helpful where as something at the point of talking about literal equality is more reader-focused.
> 
> 	Andy
>