- From: Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@ontopia.net>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 17:43:16 +0200
- To: <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
* Brian McBride | | The other option at the time was a binary valued relation e.g. | | Eg:company eg:isBankrupt "true"^^xsd:boolean . Now that is a workable alternative, and one that is much preferrable to defining rdftm:True, since it doesn't require specific vocabulary. It seems to me that translating RDF statements of the form :x :y "true"^^xsd:boolean . into something along the lines of :y(:x : _____) /* need to supply role type here, but that's doable */ is semantically safe, and also syntax-preserving. The same goes for the reverse translation. The problem, of course, is what to translate :x :y "false"^^xsd:boolean . to, since there is a difference between explicitly knowing that :x is not bankrupt, and not knowing. It's conceivable that we might solve this with scope, but I am not sure. -- Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian <URL: http://www.ontopia.net > GSM: +47 98 21 55 50 <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >
Received on Wednesday, 29 June 2005 15:43:52 UTC