- From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
- Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 14:22:51 -0500
- To: axel@polleres.net
- Cc: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>, Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Axel wrote: > > > A given IRI is interpreted as some abstract object in a given > > interpretation. I do not understand how a casting function for such > > abstract objects can be defined in a meaningful way. > > yes, it seems hairy/impossible to define it properly within the current > FLD framework, because I can, even if I assume fixed interpretations for > cast-functions, not "access" the lexical representation from this fixed > interpretation... It seems to me that the problem is with an inappropriate use of IRIs. You seem to be treating them as a data type, while IRIs are like RDF resources, and thus are not data types. Maybe you need to introduce a data type for what you want (not sure). --michael > ... still, I can implement a system which does exactly the builtin which > I have in mind without major troubles... hmmm. > > Axel > > 1. http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/ > 2. http://www.polleres.net/presentations/20071127-SPARQL++ODBASE2007.pdf > > > > best, Jos > > > >> > >> Axel
Received on Monday, 3 March 2008 20:12:20 UTC