- 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