Re: Subjects as Literals, [was Re: The Ordered List Ontology]


Please, don't extend the existing model, for two reasons.

>From implementor's POV, arbitrary literals are bad for any sort of

>From AI specialist's POV, literals are simply not subjects.
Can a number or a string _act_? Can you provide a living specimen of it?
The feature is useless in modelling of the real world. so let it stay
jailed in object position. If RDF could be extended, there are many
better things to add, e.g., physical units.

Finally, I don't want to get rounding errors on graphs like I can get
them in CAD system. Should subject 3.14151956 and subject
3.1415195599999 connect their triples, can you guess? In any CAD I have
a tolerance level to treat two points as "equal enough" and "their"
geometric shapes connected; I'd prefer to never chose a tolerance level
for a graph of heterogeneous or simply unknown nature.

Best Regards,

Ivan Mikhailov
OpenLink Software

Received on Thursday, 1 July 2010 13:51:27 UTC