Re: Another comment about confidence value.

Hi Charles,

man, 18,.04.2005 kl. 14.01 +0200, skrev Charles McCathieNevile:
> > Yes, the confidence property seems to me to be very important too. And I  
> > agree that the process model of assigning the value is probably even  
> > more important than the value itself. However, it is a big concern to me  
> > if we do not a define a datatype. At the most, may be a couple of values  
> > with some sort of conversion scheme between them but I think we are  
> > going to get really big interoperability problems if we do not define  
> > values.
> 
> I think we are as likely to get interoperability problems by definng  
> smethng as by not doing so - especially if we don't leave it optional.
> 
> But we do clearly need to explain how to define one - which among other  
> things means reviewing the work coming out of the Semantic Web Best  
> Practices group on how to define a datatype (that was left as a work item  
> by the RDF core group, although the relevant task force is I think at the  
> point of publishing a draft).

It would be nice if someone defined a datatype for probability that
could be subclassed as confidence value. Probability would in turn be a
real number (float or double) with restrictions that it is between 0 and
1.

Are there no datatypes that can be used for this yet?

Mvh.
-- 
Nils Ulltveit-Moe <nils@u-moe.no>

Received on Monday, 18 April 2005 20:10:30 UTC