- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 20:57:21 +0100
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Brian McBride wrote: > > Look at the assertions in your example, above. There are two > > existential claims made in there. One says that something (X) exists > > which bears the description-1 (ie the inverse of description) > > relation to advert123 and the product relation to roses and the > > minQuantity relation to some other thing Y. X could be a 'service', > > sure. But what kind of thing is Y? It bears a units relation to kg > > and a minValue relation to 100. It sounds like a sale, or a > > transaction, or maybe a quantity of roses. But whatever it is, the > > sentences only assert that *one* of it exists. There is nothing here > > that could possibly convey what is meant by the English gloss of "a > > service that sells roses in quantities of at least 100 kg" (that is a > > hell of a lot of roses, by the way) , since that gloss uses the > > plural ("quantities"), but there isn't anything in the logical > > version that implies more than one of anything. > > How about Y represents a range with a lower bound of 100Kg and an > unspecified upper bound. Oops - re-reading the example, I wrote nonsense. The example is wrong. It should read something like: advert123 role buyer and thereExists ?X advert123 description ?X ?X product roses thereExists ?Y ?X minQuantitiy ?Y ?Y units kg ?Y value 100 I also think the role really should be a property of ?X, but I've left that for now. ?Y simply denotes 100Kg. Or it could have been: advert123 role buyer and thereExists ?X advert123 description ?X ?X product roses thereExists ?Y ?X quantity ?Y ?Y units kg ?Y minvalue 100 in which case ?Y could represent a range with an unbounded upper limit. Brian
Received on Tuesday, 24 July 2001 15:59:59 UTC