- From: Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
- Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2020 02:42:59 +0000
- To: Anthony Moretti <anthony.moretti@gmail.com>, Laufer <laufer@globo.com>
- CC: Patrick J Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <SY2PR01MB2891ECFC1ACA55E1C5CE6DC388670@SY2PR01MB2891.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com>
* The "Description" suffix leads to a little confusion I think. By the same logic xsd:DateTime could be named xsd:DateTimeDescription, Indeed. Unfortunately that was the name given to the class by the designers of the DAML/OIL ontology that grew into OWL-Time. Our hands were tied. Though another view is that the local-name in the URI is not actually the class name, and we would be better off if the URI was unreadable (see OBO). Maybe we shouldn’t go there in this thread, though it does have some relationship to node-designators. From: Anthony Moretti <anthony.moretti@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, 8 July, 2020 10:36 To: Laufer <laufer@globo.com> Cc: Patrick J Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>; Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org> Subject: Re: Blank nodes must DIE! [ was Re: Blank nodes semantics - existential variables?] In this specific case it could be rdf:type time:DateTimeDescription from OWL-Time. See https://www.w3.org/TR/owl-time/#time-position That's right, Simon. Correct me if I'm wrong though, using type: time:DateTimeDescription versus: type: xsd:DateTime makes one a reference type and the other a value type. The "Description" suffix leads to a little confusion I think. By the same logic xsd:DateTime could be named xsd:DateTimeDescription, I think time:DateTime might have been sufficient. The Circle example might be a better example in any case. Anthony On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 5:32 PM Laufer <laufer@globo.com<mailto:laufer@globo.com>> wrote: It is a poetic license. And it is a concise way of expressing my understanding of how to denote everything that exists, including us. Laufer Em 07/07/2020 20:23, Patrick J Hayes escreveu: Ahem. Use/mention confusion. We are not bnodes. We can be /denoted by/ bnodes. But since that is true of everything that exists, it isn't a terribly great accomplishment. Pat On Jul 7, 2020, at 3:44 PM, Laufer <laufer@globo.com<mailto:laufer@globo.com>> wrote: we are blank nodes Cheers, _:x :name "Laufer" --- 劳费尔 . . . .. . . . . . .. . .. . --- 劳费尔 . . . .. . . . . . .. . .. .
Received on Wednesday, 8 July 2020 02:43:58 UTC